This Results Based Financing and Universal Health Coverage poster draws on the experience of implementing a controlled trial in northern Uganda designed to assess the costs and benefits of RBF versus conventional input based financing.
NU Health generated rich, multi-dimensional data related to innovative practice in health systems development. In particular,
there were significant improvements in a range of key indicators in the RBF facilities relative to the IBF facilities. Overall, in RBF versus IBF, a child was:
- Three times more likely to be treated correctly for malaria
- Over six times more likely to be treated correctly for pneumonia
- Over eight times more likely to be treated correctly for diarrhoea
The main effect in terms of quality of care was differentiated by level of institution. The strongest improvements were observed in lower level facilities. Indicators related to both utilisation and supply of essential medicines similarly showed the most improvement in the lower level facilities in the RBF arm relative to the IBF arm.
With the introduction of more predictable health system support and the incentive-verification system provided by RBF, front-line staff were able to improve both the quality and quantity of health services in these lower level facilities. The findings of this study support the assertion that by increasing access to and utilisation of better quality services, Results Based Financing can contribute to improving health system performance and achieving Universal Health Coverage.
This poster was presented at the 2016 Global Symposium on Health Systems Research in Vancouver as part of the dissemination of the findings from the NU Health programme. The focus of the symposium was resilient and responsive health systems for a changing world.