2014
DOI: 10.1596/978-1-4648-0128-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance-Based Financing Toolkit

Abstract: This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. Note that The World Bank does not necessarily own each component of the content included in the work. The World Bank therefore does not warrant that the use of the content contained in the work will not infringe on the rights of third parties. The risk of claims resulting from such infringement rests solely with you.The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
215
1
4

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 146 publications
(222 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
2
215
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Stakeholders perceive it as some additional programme, and the two cases we studied rather constitute hybrid approaches containing partial elements of PBF juxtaposing on old rules and institutions. A comparison between how the two PBF approaches under consideration in this paper are currently implemented and international best practices (4,5) points to some design flaws that prevent PBF to be fully operational. Especially, one can point the relatively low effective management freedom of health facilities (even those under treatment in the WB approach since they still rely on centralised resource allocation rules for most of their budget as well as for personnel management), the disconnection from other reform processes such as decentralisation, the duplication with usual activities (notably monitoring) and the relatively low budget of PBF (amounting to about 1 US dollar per capita per year in the BTC approach and 2.17 US dollars per capita per year in the WB approach, which is judged insufficient compared to the international standard of about 3 US dollars (4,5).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Stakeholders perceive it as some additional programme, and the two cases we studied rather constitute hybrid approaches containing partial elements of PBF juxtaposing on old rules and institutions. A comparison between how the two PBF approaches under consideration in this paper are currently implemented and international best practices (4,5) points to some design flaws that prevent PBF to be fully operational. Especially, one can point the relatively low effective management freedom of health facilities (even those under treatment in the WB approach since they still rely on centralised resource allocation rules for most of their budget as well as for personnel management), the disconnection from other reform processes such as decentralisation, the duplication with usual activities (notably monitoring) and the relatively low budget of PBF (amounting to about 1 US dollar per capita per year in the BTC approach and 2.17 US dollars per capita per year in the WB approach, which is judged insufficient compared to the international standard of about 3 US dollars (4,5).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, as for any policy, there might be some gap between policy and practice. A first gap can be found between the PBF 'pure approaches' such as found in the literature (4,5) and the approaches developed in Benin. A second gap, which is more important from the perspective of sociology and grounded studies, relates to the divergences between what is supposed to be done according to the country frameworks, and what is observed on the field (which could be called 'temporary results').…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Many low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) have adopted performance-based financing (PBF) to improve health service delivery and outcomes (Fritsche et al 2014). PBF is a results-based financing (RBF) approach where financial incentives are directed to providers, on a fee-for-service basis, contingent on the quality of services provided (Musgrove 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%