Verification in Results-Based Financing for Health : Summary of Findings and Recommendations from a Cross-Case Analysis
Despite the increasing popularity of Results Based Financing, there is little evidence or documentation of different verification strategies and how strategies relate to the verification results. Documentation of implementation processes including...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Working Paper |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/504661485897909610/Verification-in-results-based-financing-for-health http://hdl.handle.net/10986/26040 |
| Summary: | Despite the increasing popularity of
Results Based Financing, there is little evidence or
documentation of different verification strategies and how
strategies relate to the verification results. Documentation
of implementation processes including those pertaining to
verification of outputs/results is lacking in World
Bank-financed RBF projects in the health sector. The overall
objective of this cross-case analysis is to expand knowledge
about verification processes andpractices to address the
design and implementation needs of RBF projects. This study
adds toavailable knowledge by comparing the characteristics
of verification strategies as well as available data on
costs (using level of effort as a proxy), savings, and
verification results to date in six countries: Afghanistan,
Argentina, Burundi, Panama, Rwanda, and the UK. These case
studies were purposively selected to explore a number of
factors, including: how a variety of results are verified;
how the verification strategy is being implemented at
different levels in the health system; and the implications
of having different types of actors (that is, third-party
versus internal verifiers) involved in the verification
process. In this cross-case analysis, the discussion of
similarities and differences in verification methods across
the six cases as well as the analysis of findings is guided
by a conceptual framework developed for this study. This
study presents seventeen key findings, and nine recommendations. |
|---|