• About us
  • GSDRC Publications
  • Research Helpdesk
  • E-Bulletin
  • Privacy policy

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
    • Public sector management
    • Security & justice
    • Service delivery
    • State-society relations
  • Social Development
    • Gender
    • Inequalities & exclusion
    • Social protection
    • Poverty & wellbeing
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
    • Recovery & reconstruction
    • Refugees/IDPs
    • Risk & resilience
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
    • Peacebuilding
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
    • Migration & diaspora
    • Population growth
    • Urbanisation
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
    • Institutions & social norms
    • PEA / Thinking & working politically
    • Results-based approaches
    • Theories of change
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
    • Multilateral aid
    • Private sector partnerships
    • Technical assistance
  • M&E
    • Indicators
    • Learning
    • M&E approaches
Home»GSDRC Publications»Non-State Providers of Health Services in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States

Non-State Providers of Health Services in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States

Helpdesk Report
  • Andrew McDevitt
February 2009

Question

Collect information on delivery of health services by non-state providers in fragile and conflict-affected states, highlighting any evaluations of effectiveness in terms of 1) how they contribute to supporting government policies, strategies and systems, and 2) the effectiveness of the delivery of the services. What lessons arise from these evaluations?

Summary

Most mechanisms that use NSPs to deliver services are only being applied at a very small scale in fragile states. There is some evidence that the most widely used mechanism – contracting – can increase service utilisation, increase service quality, improve efficiency, reduce service fragmentation, and support strengthening of national capacity. The basic package of health services (BPHS) contracting approach, in particular, is often cited as an effective mechanism for health service delivery in fragile states. However, some observers have voiced concern that contracting can promote precipitous decentralisation, erode NSP independence, and actually fragment the health system given that NSPs are seldom able to provide an overall framework in which to operate.

The literature offers a number of recommendations for non state provision of health services in fragile contexts, including:

  • supporting longer term, inclusive planning and implementation processes
  • providing longer term, predictable funding
  • carrying out more effective sectoral monitoring and evaluation
  • developing mechanisms for improved information exchange
  • assuring a minimal stewardship function for the government
  • improving both the state and the NSP’s capacity to work together
  • identifying and capitalising on existing sources of capacity and political will
  • creating incentives for using NGOs and firms to build local capacity and engage with public health system actors.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID Politics and State Team

Related Content

Interventions in LICs and LMICs to improve air quality and/or mitigate its impacts
Helpdesk Report
2020
Monitoring Air Quality in Low- Income and Lower Middle-Income Countries
Helpdesk Report
2020
Prevalence of health impacts related to exposure to poor air quality among children in Low and Lower Middle-Income Countries
Helpdesk Report
2020
Water security beyond Covid-19
Helpdesk Report
2020
birminghamids hcri

gro.crdsg@seiriuqne Feedback Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2022; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2022; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2022
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2022; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2022; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2022