Cargando…
The Health Systems Funding Platform: Is this where we thought we were going?
BACKGROUND: In March 2009, the Task Force for Innovative International Financing for Health Systems recommended "a health systems funding platform for the Global Fund, GAVI Alliance, the World Bank and others to coordinate, mobilize, streamline and channel the flow of existing and new internati...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3117689/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21595940 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-7-16 |
_version_ | 1782206352861429760 |
---|---|
author | Hill, Peter S Vermeiren, Peter Miti, Katabaro Ooms, Gorik Van Damme, Wim |
author_facet | Hill, Peter S Vermeiren, Peter Miti, Katabaro Ooms, Gorik Van Damme, Wim |
author_sort | Hill, Peter S |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In March 2009, the Task Force for Innovative International Financing for Health Systems recommended "a health systems funding platform for the Global Fund, GAVI Alliance, the World Bank and others to coordinate, mobilize, streamline and channel the flow of existing and new international resources to support national health strategies." Momentum to establish the Health Systems Funding Platform was swift, with the World Bank convening a Technical Workshop on Health Systems Strengthening (HSS), and serial meetings organized to progress the agenda. Despite its potential significance, there has been little comment in peer-reviewed literature, though some disquiet in the international development community around the scope of the Platform and the capacity of the partners, which appears disproportionate to the available information. METHODS: This case study uses documentary analysis, participant observation and 24 in-depth interviews to examine the processes of development and key issues raised by the Platform. RESULTS: The findings show a fluid and volatile process, with debate over whether ongoing engagement in HSS by Global Fund and GAVI represents a dilution of organizational focus, risking ongoing support, or a paradigm shift that facilitates the achievement of targeted objectives, builds systems capacity, and will attract additional resources. Uncertainty in the development of the Platform reflects the flexibility of the recently formed global health initiatives, and the instability of donor commitments, particularly in the current financial climate. But implicit in the conflict is tension between key global stakeholders over defining and ownership of the health systems agenda. CONCLUSIONS: The tensions appear to have been resolved through a focus on national planning, applying International Health Partnership principles, though the global financial crisis and key personnel changes may yet alter outcomes. Despite its dynamic evolution, the Platform may offer an incremental path towards increasing integration around health systems, that has not been previously possible. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3117689 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31176892011-06-18 The Health Systems Funding Platform: Is this where we thought we were going? Hill, Peter S Vermeiren, Peter Miti, Katabaro Ooms, Gorik Van Damme, Wim Global Health Research BACKGROUND: In March 2009, the Task Force for Innovative International Financing for Health Systems recommended "a health systems funding platform for the Global Fund, GAVI Alliance, the World Bank and others to coordinate, mobilize, streamline and channel the flow of existing and new international resources to support national health strategies." Momentum to establish the Health Systems Funding Platform was swift, with the World Bank convening a Technical Workshop on Health Systems Strengthening (HSS), and serial meetings organized to progress the agenda. Despite its potential significance, there has been little comment in peer-reviewed literature, though some disquiet in the international development community around the scope of the Platform and the capacity of the partners, which appears disproportionate to the available information. METHODS: This case study uses documentary analysis, participant observation and 24 in-depth interviews to examine the processes of development and key issues raised by the Platform. RESULTS: The findings show a fluid and volatile process, with debate over whether ongoing engagement in HSS by Global Fund and GAVI represents a dilution of organizational focus, risking ongoing support, or a paradigm shift that facilitates the achievement of targeted objectives, builds systems capacity, and will attract additional resources. Uncertainty in the development of the Platform reflects the flexibility of the recently formed global health initiatives, and the instability of donor commitments, particularly in the current financial climate. But implicit in the conflict is tension between key global stakeholders over defining and ownership of the health systems agenda. CONCLUSIONS: The tensions appear to have been resolved through a focus on national planning, applying International Health Partnership principles, though the global financial crisis and key personnel changes may yet alter outcomes. Despite its dynamic evolution, the Platform may offer an incremental path towards increasing integration around health systems, that has not been previously possible. BioMed Central 2011-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3117689/ /pubmed/21595940 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-7-16 Text en Copyright ©2011 Hill et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Hill, Peter S Vermeiren, Peter Miti, Katabaro Ooms, Gorik Van Damme, Wim The Health Systems Funding Platform: Is this where we thought we were going? |
title | The Health Systems Funding Platform: Is this where we thought we were going? |
title_full | The Health Systems Funding Platform: Is this where we thought we were going? |
title_fullStr | The Health Systems Funding Platform: Is this where we thought we were going? |
title_full_unstemmed | The Health Systems Funding Platform: Is this where we thought we were going? |
title_short | The Health Systems Funding Platform: Is this where we thought we were going? |
title_sort | health systems funding platform: is this where we thought we were going? |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3117689/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21595940 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-7-16 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hillpeters thehealthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT vermeirenpeter thehealthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT mitikatabaro thehealthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT oomsgorik thehealthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT vandammewim thehealthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT hillpeters healthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT vermeirenpeter healthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT mitikatabaro healthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT oomsgorik healthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing AT vandammewim healthsystemsfundingplatformisthiswherewethoughtweweregoing |