Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Evaluation of the Rwanda Community Performance-Based Financing Program

396 views

Published on

This study evaluates the impact of two interventions introduced as part of the Rwanda Community Performance-Based Financing Program to increase coverage of targeted maternal and child health services: rewards to cooperatives of community health workers and demand-side conditional in-kind transfers. The evaluation exploits experimental design with intervention randomly assigned at the sub-district level for a duration of two and a half years. The analysis finds no impact of the incentives to cooperatives of community health workers. However, conditional in-kind demand-side incentives are shown to significantly increase take up of timely antenatal and postnatal consultations.

Published in: Healthcare
  • DOWNLOAD THE BOOK INTO AVAILABLE FORMAT (New Update) ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... Download Full PDF EBOOK here { https://soo.gd/irt2 } ......................................................................................................................... Download Full EPUB Ebook here { https://soo.gd/irt2 } ......................................................................................................................... Download Full doc Ebook here { https://soo.gd/irt2 } ......................................................................................................................... Download PDF EBOOK here { https://soo.gd/irt2 } ......................................................................................................................... Download EPUB Ebook here { https://soo.gd/irt2 } ......................................................................................................................... Download doc Ebook here { https://soo.gd/irt2 } ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................... eBook is an electronic version of a traditional print book THE can be read by using a personal computer or by using an eBook reader. (An eBook reader can be a software application for use on a computer such as Microsoft's free Reader application, or a book-sized computer THE is used solely as a reading device such as Nuvomedia's Rocket eBook.) Users can purchase an eBook on diskette or CD, but the most popular method of getting an eBook is to purchase a downloadable file of the eBook (or other reading material) from a Web site (such as Barnes and Noble) to be read from the user's computer or reading device. Generally, an eBook can be downloaded in five minutes or less ......................................................................................................................... .............. Browse by Genre Available eBOOK .............................................................................................................................. Art, Biography, Business, Chick Lit, Children's, Christian, Classics, Comics, Contemporary, CookBOOK, Manga, Memoir, Music, Mystery, Non Fiction, Paranormal, Philosophy, Poetry, Psychology, Religion, Romance, Science, Science Fiction, Self Help, Suspense, Spirituality, Sports, Thriller, Travel, Young Adult, Crime, EBOOK, Fantasy, Fiction, Graphic Novels, Historical Fiction, History, Horror, Humor And Comedy, ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... .....BEST SELLER FOR EBOOK RECOMMEND............................................................. ......................................................................................................................... Blowout: Corrupted Democracy, Rogue State Russia, and the Richest, Most Destructive Industry on Earth,-- The Ride of a Lifetime: Lessons Learned from 15 Years as CEO of the Walt Disney Company,-- Call Sign Chaos: Learning to Lead,-- StrengthsFinder 2.0,-- Stillness Is the Key,-- She Said: Breaking the Sexual Harassment Story THE Helped Ignite a Movement,-- Atomic Habits: An Easy & Proven Way to Build Good Habits & Break Bad Ones,-- Everything Is Figureoutable,-- What It Takes: Lessons in the Pursuit of Excellence,-- Rich Dad Poor Dad: What the Rich Teach Their Kids About Money THE the Poor and Middle Class Do Not!,-- The Total Money Makeover: Classic Edition: A Proven Plan for Financial Fitness,-- Shut Up and Listen!: Hard Business Truths THE Will Help You Succeed, ......................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Evaluation of the Rwanda Community Performance-Based Financing Program

  1. 1. Impact Evaluation of the Rwanda Community Performance-Based Financing Program College of Medicine and Health Sciences School of Public Health
  2. 2. Background: Health in Rwanda Rwanda has experienced dramatic changes in indicators of health outcomes and utilization of health services in recent years DHS 2005 DHS 2010 DHS 2014-15 Under-5 mortality (per 1,000 live births) 152 76 50 Maternal Mortality (per 100,000 live births) 750 476 210 Delivery at Health Facility 28% 69% 91% ANC by skilled provider 94% 98% 99.8% Total Fertility Rate 6.1 4.6 4.2
  3. 3. Background: IE of PBF (First Generation) Basinga, Gertler et al. 2012; Gertler and Vermeersch 2012; de Walque, Gertler et al 2015 PBF at the health facility level was scaled up nationally in 2008 Positive Impact • Quantity: • Institutional deliveries • Preventative care visits by children • VCT for couples • Quality of prenatal care • Health Outcomes of children No Impact • Prenatal care utilization • Use of modern contraceptives
  4. 4. Background: Community PBF (Second Generation) • Since 2009, Community Health Workers (CHWs) were paid for reporting on health indicators in their communities • Additional components were added through the Community Performance- Based Financing Program in order to promote targeted services • This study evaluates the impact of 2 interventions that were added to the scheme: 1. Performance incentives for CHW cooperatives 2. Demand-side in-kind incentives
  5. 5. Background: organization of CHWs in Rwanda Each village has 3 volunteers serving as Community Health Workers (CHWs). Multidisciplinary CHWs CHW in Charge of Maternal and Neonatal Health Criteria • Can read and write • Age 20-50 • Lives in the village • Elected by the village residents
  6. 6. Background: organization of CHWs in Rwanda All the CHWs within the catchment area of a health center are organized in a CHW cooperative. Cooperative
  7. 7. Background: organization of CHWs in Rwanda 70% of payments received by a cooperative must be invested in income generating activities (IGAs). 30% of the payments and revenues from the IGAs are given to cooperative members. It is up to the cooperatives to determine distribution rules.
  8. 8. Intervention #1: Performance Incentives for CHW Cooperatives CHW cooperatives received financial rewards for: 1. Nutrition monitoring: # children 6-59 months monitored 2. Timely Antenatal Care: # of women accompanied/referred within first 4 months of pregnancy 3. In-Facility Delivery: # of women accompanied/referred for assisted delivery 4. New Family Planning users: # referred to health center 5. Regular Family Planning Users: # regular users at health center • 4 indicators related to TB and HIV were added at a later stage and not evaluated
  9. 9. Intervention #2: Demand-Side In-Kind Transfers Women received gifts for seeking care for the following services: * Women can only receive the gifts for one pregnancy every 3 years. Eligibility* Value (Ceiling) Suggested Package Initiation of Antenatal Care during first 4 months of pregnancy 5 USD Adult cloth and water treatment tablets OR baby cloth package and water treatment tablets Delivery in health center 6.67 USD Baby soap, baby shawl and baby bed sheets Initiation of Postnatal Care during the 10 days after delivery 3.33 USD An umbrella and water treatment tablets OR Adult cloths
  10. 10. Research Questions 1. Do the demand-side in-kind transfers and the performance incentives to CHW coops increase • Initiation of prenatal care within first 4 months of pregnancies? • Total prenatal care visit? • In-facility deliveries? • Rate of postnatal care within 10 days after delivery? 2. Is there a multiplicative effect when both interventions are implemented? 3. Do the performance incentives to CHW coops affect • Behavior and motivation of the CHWs? • Use of modern contraceptives? • Growth monitoring of children under 5
  11. 11. Study Design: RCT 198 sectors (sub-districts) were randomly allocated into 4 study arms: * Coops paid for reporting received the average amount received by the coops paid for performance Payments to CHW Coops For Reporting* For Performance Demand-Side Transfers No C S Yes D D+S
  12. 12. Study Design: Selection and Randomization of Sectors • Study conducted in 19 districts in 4 provinces • Excluding Kigali • 18 districts of previous IE • A sector usually corresponds to a catchment area of a health center • Include only sectors with a public or non-for-profit faith-based health centers • Exclude 30 sectors where the demand-side intervention was piloted • Sectors blocked by district and poverty ranking
  13. 13. Study Design: Randomization of Sectors
  14. 14. Study Design: Baseline Survey • 12 villages were randomly selected within the catchment area of each health center • Household survey • A field supervisor consulted village leader and/or CHW to identify household with most recent birth or pregnancy (N = 2,376) • Household questionnaire • Interview with “core” respondent • CHW survey • Target of 2 CHWS in each selected village (N = 4,668) • CHW in charge of maternal and neo-natal health should have been included • Cooperative survey (N = 197)
  15. 15. Study Design: Follow Up Survey • Same villages were visited • Household survey: two samples! • Women with most recent birth in their village (N = 2,343) • “Baseline” Women (N = 2,157) • CHW survey • CHW in charge of maternal and neo-natal health (N = 2,220) • Cooperative survey (N = 197) • Health Center Assessment (N = 197)
  16. 16. Timeline 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 February-May 2010 • Baseline Survey November 2013-June 2014 • Follow-up Survey October 2010 • Interventions Introduced February 2013 • Last transfer of funds for in-kind transfers
  17. 17. Descriptive Analysis: Baseline Sample Characteristics Total D S DS C Age 28.2 28.1 27.8 28.2 28.7 (6) (6) (5.8) (5.9) (6.2) Married 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.9 0.91 Education None 0.18 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.19 Primary 0.70 0.72 0.69 0.67 0.69 > primary 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 Covered by Mutelles 0.90 0.93 0.9 0.89 0.88 Number of live births 3.03 3.11 2.95 2.97 3.10 (2.12) (2.12) (2.18) (2.03) (2.18) Ever used modern FP 0.4 0.4 0.37 0.41 0.41 Core Respondents
  18. 18. Descriptive Analysis: Baseline Sample Characteristics Care during last pregnancy At least one ANC visit 98% First ANC visit in first 4 months of pregnancy 63% At least 4 ANC visits 37% Skilled-attended in-facility delivery 79% PNC within 10 days of birth 38% Gift received for ANC* 5% Gift received for delivery* 4% Gist received for PNC 2% *The reported value of gifts is about a third of those set by the program for the different services.
  19. 19. Descriptive Analysis: Comparison with the RDHS 2010 Baseline RDHS 2010 Age 28.2 29.1 Education None 0.17 0.18 Primary 0.69 0.75 > primary 0.14 0.07 Number of births 3.01 3.34 Care during last pregnancy: At least one ANC visit 0.98 0.98 First ANC visit in first 4 months of pregnancy 0.63 0.63 At least 4 ANC visits 0.37 0.36 Skilled-attended in-facility delivery 0.79 0.79 PNC within 10 days of birth 0.38 0.18 Comparing core respondents to RDHS sample of women with a pregnancy during the two previous years
  20. 20. Descriptive Analysis: Baseline Sample Characteristics Characteristics of CHWs in charge of maternal and neonatal health Mean SD Age 39.1 (9.4) Female 0.94 Education Primary 0.61 > primary 0.39 Number of years as CHW 2.6 (3.7) Number of HHs in village 122 (117) Number of hours spent on health activities in past week 17.7 (28) Distance to health center (in km) 4.1 (4.9)
  21. 21. Descriptive Analysis: Time Trends 98% 63% 36% 79% 34% 99% 72% 40% 94% 13% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Any ANC Timely ANC ≥ 4 ANC In-facility Delivery Timely PNC Baseline Follow-up Baseline and Follow-up rates among Control group
  22. 22. Descriptive Analysis: Program Implementation Incentivized indicators Unit Fees (USD) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Nutrition Monitoring 3.24 0.57 0.43 0.43 0.43 Timely Antenatal Care 2.24 1.12 0.81 0.81 0.81 In-facility Delivery 2.73 1.37 0.99 0.99 0.99 New Family Planning User 2.90 1.45 1.05 1.05 1.05 Regular Family Planning User 2.11 1.06 0.77 0.77 0.77 Incentive amounts reduced during the implementation of the program
  23. 23. Descriptive Analysis: Program Implementation « D'habitude, est-ce que votre centre de sante donne des cadeaux aux femmes qui viennent pour les services suivants: » Indicator D S DS C Timely ANC 0.94 0.16 0.90 0.08 In-facility delivery 0.92 0.18 0.88 0.13 Timely PNC 0.90 0.09 0.88 0.08
  24. 24. Descriptive Analysis: Program Implementation 19% 49% 18% 14% Experience of stock outs by health centers No stock outs Sometime Often Very Often 69% 23% 6% Availability of funds Procurement Supplier Reason for stock outs
  25. 25. Descriptive Analysis: Program Implementation D S DS C Obs. D-C S-C DS-C Mean Mean Mean Mean p-value p-value p-value Demand-side incentives 1st ANC 0.16 0.10 0.16 0.10 0.00*** 0.93 0.00*** 3420 1st ANC within 4 months of pregnancy 0.18 0.11 0.18 0.11 0.00*** 0.84 0.00*** 2696 Delivery inhealthfacility 0.14 0.04 0.12 0.05 0.00*** 0.77 0.00*** 3109 PNC 0.06 0.00 0.08 0.02 0.09* 0.16 0.01*** 718 PNCwithin10days of birth 0.06 0.00 0.09 0.03 0.29 0.05** 0.03** 538 T-test Share of women who received gifts
  26. 26. Descriptive Analysis: Program Implementation Share of eligible women who received gifts, by year of birth 2011 2012 2013 Promise 3% 3% 2% Gift 33% 19% 14% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Timely ANC 2011 2012 2013 Promise 1% 2% 4% Gift 34% 14% 12% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% In-FacilityDelivery 2011 2012 2013 Promise 3% 3% 2% Gift 33% 19% 14% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Timely PNC * Combining samples of recently pregnant women and “baseline” women; only pregnancies ending in live births
  27. 27. Results: Maternal Health Services • Indicators: • Timely ANC • In-facility deliveries • Timely PNC • Sample of women with most recent birth in their village • Pregnancies resulting in a live birth
  28. 28. Results: ANC visit within first 4 months of pregnancy • A positive and significant (at the 1% level) impact of the demand-side in-kind incentives of about 10 percentage points • The CHW incentives are not found to have a significant effect • No difference between the ‘Demand’ and the ‘Demand+Supply’ treatment arms 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% Control Demand Supply D + S Timely ANC 72% 82% 74% 80% Timely ANC
  29. 29. Results: at least 4 ANC visits • Not targeted by the program! • Higher in the intervention sectors, but not statistically significant at the 10% level 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Control Demand Supply D + S 4 ANC 40% 46% 43% 45% Four or more ANC visits
  30. 30. Results: Skilled-attended in-facility delivery • No statistically significant difference between the treatment arms • Rate has increased substantially in the duration of the study for other reasons 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% Control Demand Supply D + S Deliv 94% 95% 96% 94% In-Facility Delivery
  31. 31. Results: PNC within 10 days after delivery • A positive and significant (at the 5% level) impact of the demand-side in-kind incentives of about 7 percentage points • Not targeted by the CHW incentives intervention 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Control Demand Supply D + S Timely PNC 13% 22% 11% 20% PNC within 10 days after delivery
  32. 32. Results: targeted maternal health indicators • Results are robust • Inclusion of controls • Diff-in-diff specification • Exclusion of 3 misclassified sectors • Negligible changes when sample weights are used • Using data on number of households in each sector
  33. 33. Results: Fertility and Family Planning • Indicators • Birth since baseline • Ever used modern family planning method • With and without adjustment for baseline response • Sample of baseline women • Caveat: not optimal for estimating this • Caveat: higher attrition among treatment groups implementing the supply- side intervention
  34. 34. Results: Fertility and Family Planning Control Demand Supply D + S Pregnancy 53% 55% 59% 55% Modern 52% 57% 50% 54% Modern* 68% 69% 64% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% • No statistically significant impact on any of the indicators
  35. 35. Results: Nutritional monitoring • Indicator: • Child was measured in the past 6 months to determine nutritional status • Sample of children 6-59 months • Of all women (recent pregnancies and baseline women)
  36. 36. Results: Fertility and Family Planning 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Control Demand Supply D + S Child measured 79% 80% 75% 75% Growth Monitoring in past 6 months • No statistically significant impact
  37. 37. Other results: CHW • No Impact on CHW behavior • Hours spent on health activities • Number of households visited • Consulting other CHWs • No Impact on measures of satisfaction and motivation of CHWs • No impact on CHW behavior reported by the women • CHWs referred or accompanied to ANC, Delivery or PNC services • CHWs provided information on these services • Interacted with CHWs in the past three months (in the community or home visits) • Satisfaction from CHWs • Women in Demand and D+S sectors report CHWs were aware earlier of their pregnancies
  38. 38. Other results: Cooperatives • No Impact on.. • Number of meetings • Number of members recruited, dismissed, resigned in the past 12 month • Cooperative income • Whether payments are allocated by performance • Internal assessment of coop members
  39. 39. • The demand-side in-kind incentives caused an increase in timely ANC and PNC services • Although some challenges in procurement and frequent stock outs • Although some health centers independently implemented their own demand-side incentives strategies to promote utilization • Although funding ended before end-line data collection • Consistent with findings in other countries that implemented demand-side cash transfers Key Findings: Demand-Side In-Kind Incentives
  40. 40. • No impact of incentives to CHW cooperative on targeted indicators, CHW behaviors and CHW motivation. • Potential reasons for lack of impact –Incentives were too low –Collective reward but individual effort –Pay-for-reporting could have already oriented the CHWs towards targeted indicators –Limited scope given the many supply-side programs targeting the same indicators Key Findings: Performance Incentives to CHW Coops
  41. 41. • Self-reported indicators • Timing of survey relative to termination of the demand-side intervention • Hoping to include analysis of administrative data • Not optimal sample for the analysis of fertility and family planning indicators Caveats
  42. 42. • Ministry of Health • Fidel Ngabo • Cathy Mugeni • University of Rwanda • Ina R. Kalisa • James Humuza • Jeanine Condo • Vedaste Ndahindwa • The World Bank • Gil Shapira • Netsanet W. Workie • Jeanette Walldorf Research Team The study was funded by the Health Results Innovation Trust Fund (HRITF)
  43. 43. Thank you!

×