Evidence-based budgeting policy in maternal and child health programme : do they work?

Current centrally driven maternal, neonatal, and child health (MNCH) policies do not address geographical disparities faced by different Indonesian provinces and districts. Low local government commitment is still the main obstacle in health budgeting policy. Lack of evidence-based budget planning leads to unsound health planning and implementation. Therefore, this study aims to assess the current health financing mechanism used in one Indonesian province, the Province of Papua, which has low MNCH outcomes, and finds that human resource limitation poses a serious problem in scaling up for priority interventions

Dampak Keterlibatan BAPPEDA dalam Rangka Pengembangan Kapasitas SKPD Lintas Sektor bagi Perencanaan dan Penganggaran Program Kesehatan Ibu dan Anak di Provinsi Papua

ABSTRACTBackground: Maternal and child mortality rate in Indonesia is still high. Indonesia is also expected not to reach the target of MDG 4 and 5 in 2015. In an effort to improve the health status of mothers and children in the context of decentralization, planning and budgeting at the district health is an important element of the health system. Evidence-Based Budgeting Planning Approach (EBP/PPBB), is a planning approach models that use data and academic health evidence in the framework of program decision-making as a references. Objectives: Describe the impact results of the PPBB KIA implementation in order to analyze, the impact of BAPPEDA involvement in maternal and child health planning advocacy through coordination across sectors.Research Methods: This study is a descriptive-correlative study that analyze the impact of BAPPEDA involvement in cross- sectoral planning for MCH programs, that are carried out in accordance with bottleneck analysis of the existing health system, using 66 interventions based continuum of care.Results: Cross-sectoral involvement in the planning and budgeting for MNCH brings a positive impact on the district health work plan. Bappeda involvement is crucial to coordinate cross-sectoral program for MNCH.Conclusions: Capacity of district planning staff is limited and should be improved, lack of evidence in planning is due to lack of health data, and the cross sector advocacy for health budgeting is insufficient. PPBB approach can improve capacity on planning on evidence-based and integrated planning for MNCH across-sectoral. Key Word: Planning, Maternal and Child Health, Cross Sectoral ABSTRAKLatar Belakang: Angka kematian ibu dan anak di Indonesia masih tinggi. Indonesia juga diprediksi tidak dapat mencapai target MDG 4 dan 5 pada tahun 2015. Dalam upaya peningkatan status kesehatan ibu dan anak dalam konteks desentralisasi, perencanaan dan penganggaran kesehatan di kabupaten merupakan elemen sistem kesehatan yang penting. Pendekatan Perencanaan Penganggaran Berbasis Bukti (PPBB) KIA, merupakan bentuk model perencanaan yang menggunakan bukti data dan referensi akademis dalam rangka pengambilan keputusan program kesehatan.Tujuan: memaparkan hasil implementasi PPBB-KIA dalam rangka melihat hubungan keterlibatan Bappeda dalam advokasi perencanaan perencanaan kesehatan ibu dan anak melalui koordinasi lintas sektor.Metode Penelitian: Kajian ini secara deskriptif-korelatif keterlibatan Bappeda dalam perencanaan lintas sector untuk progam KIA yang dilakukan sesuai dengan sumbatan sistem kesehatan yang ada dan berdasarkan 66 intervensi berbasis continuum of care.Hasil: Keterlibatan lintas sektor dalam perencanaan dan penganggaran KIA membawa dampak positif terhadap rencana kerja. Peran Bappeda semakin kuat dan memberikan kontribusi positif dalam kegiatan ini. Keterlibatan Bappeda terlihat berpengaruh dalam koordinasi program KIA untuk lintas sektor. Kesimpulan: Peningkatan kapasitas staf perencanaan kabupaten yang masih terbatas, kurangnya data kesehatan, peran advokasi lintas sektor ke Pemda yang belum kuat untuk meningkatkan pembiayaan kesehatan. Pendekatan PPBB dapat meningkatkan kapasitas perencanaan KIA secara berbasis bukti nyata terpadu dan terintegrasi dan lintas sektor di daerah. Kata Kunci: Perencanaan, Kesehatan Ibu dan Anak, Lintas Sekto

Perencanaan Berbasis Bukti Untuk Menjawab Kebutuhan Kesehatan Anak Dan Jaminan Sosial Bidang Kesehatan: Studi Kasus Tasikmalaya Dan Jayawijaya

Millennium Development Goal acceleration has called for innovations in health. One of the innovations is the Evidence-Based Planning (EBP) for maternal, neonatal and child health (MNCH). The Evidence-Based planning and budgeting approach is a rational approach, and put forward the scale-up of interventions that have been proven to be effective in reducing women and children deaths globally. The evidence- based interventions package for MNCH was published based on systematic review of over than 190 health interventions (Kerber, 2007) and is part of the Lancet series in maternal and child survival. The EBP was designed to improve sub-national MNCH planning and to be used at the district level, by the district health office and District hospital, as well as other healthrelevant offices/departments. In terms of social protection and health insurance, the regulation No. 24/2011 on BPJS (Social Security Managing Organization) and the President decree No. 12/2011 on Health Insurance have instructed that health care providers, including hospitals, have to provide comprehensive health services for poor and near-poor population

Who pays for health care in Asia?

We estimate the distributional incidence of health care financing in 13 Asian territories that account for 55% of the Asian population. In all territories, higher-income households contribute more to the financing of health care. The better-off contribute more as a proportion of ability to pay in most low- and lower-middle-income territories. Health care financing is slightly regressive in three high-income economies with universal social insurance. Direct taxation is the most progressive source of finance and is most so in poorer economies. In universal systems, social insurance is proportional to regressive. In high-income economies, the out-of-pocket (OOP) payments are proportional or regressive while in low-income economies the better-off spend relatively more OOP. But in most low-/middle-income countries, the better-off not only pay more, they also get more health care.