Global Health Policy Unit, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, 15a George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9LD, United Kingdom.
Results for Development Institute (R4D), Nigeria Country Office, 31 Adamu Ciroma Crescent, Jabi District, Abuja 900108, Nigeria.
Health Policy Plan. 2024 Nov 14;39(10):1032-1040. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czae082.
In recent decades, Nigeria has implemented a number of health financing reforms, yet progress towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC) has remained slow. In particular, the introduction of the Basic Health Care Provision Fund (BHCPF) through the National Health Act of 2014 sought to increase coverage of basic health services in Nigeria. However, recent studies have shown that health financing schemes like the BHCPF in Nigeria are suboptimal and have frequently attributed this to weak accountability and governance of the schemes. However, little is known about the accountability and governance of health financing in Nigeria, particularly from the perspective of key actors within the system. This study explores perceptions around governance and accountability through qualitative in-depth interviews with key BHCPF actors, including high-level government officers, academics and Civil Society Organizations. Thematic analysis of the findings reveals broad views among respondents that financial processes are appropriately ring-fenced, and that financial mismanagement is not the most pressing accountability gap. Importantly, respondents report that accountability processes are unclear and weak in subnational service delivery, and cite low utilization, implicit priority setting and poor quality as issues. To accelerate UHC progress, the accountability framework must be redesigned to include greater strategic participation and leadership from subnational governments.
近几十年来,尼日利亚实施了多项卫生融资改革,但全民健康覆盖(UHC)的进展仍然缓慢。特别是,2014 年《国家卫生法》通过基本医疗保障基金(BHCPF)的引入,旨在增加尼日利亚基本卫生服务的覆盖范围。然而,最近的研究表明,尼日利亚像 BHCPF 这样的卫生融资计划并不理想,并且经常将其归因于计划的问责制和治理薄弱。然而,对于尼日利亚卫生融资的问责制和治理,特别是从系统内的主要行为者的角度来看,人们知之甚少。本研究通过对 BHCPF 的主要行为者,包括高级政府官员、学者和民间社会组织,进行深入的定性访谈,探讨了治理和问责制方面的看法。对调查结果的主题分析显示,受访者普遍认为财务流程得到了适当的保护,财务管理不善并不是最紧迫的问责差距。重要的是,受访者报告说,问责制在次国家服务提供方面不明确且薄弱,并指出利用率低、隐含的优先排序和质量差等问题。为了加快全民健康覆盖的进展,问责制框架必须重新设计,包括加强次国家政府的战略参与和领导。