Analysis of the implementation of a social protection initiative to admit the poorest of the poor to mutual health funds in Burkina Faso

Dados Bibliográficos

ID9971981
AutoresKadidiatou Kadio (0000-0001-5841-5979, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique et Technologique, autor correspondente), Kadio Kadidiatou (IRSS/CNRST Ouagadougou Burkina Faso), Yamba Kafando (0009-0008-7128-2021, Université Joseph Ki-Zerbo), Kafando Yamba (AGIR Ouagadougou Burkina Faso), Aboubacar Ouedraogo, Ouédraogo Aboubacar (Consultant Ouagadougou Burkina Faso), Valery Ridde (0000-0001-9299-8266, IRSPUM Montreal Canada)
Ano2018
Volume71
Fascículo1
Páginas71-91
Data de publicação2018-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoInternational Social Security Review (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0020-871X • E-ISSN: 1468-246X
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/issr.12161
OpenAlexW2795350275
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas3
Referências citadas43

To enable mutual health funds to extend coverage to poor people, the Mutual Health Support Network ( Réseau d’appui aux mutuelles de santé – RAMS) in 2012 launched an initiative in collaboration with the Ministry of Social Action and Solidarity ( ministère de l’Action sociale et de la Solidarité nationale – MASSN) in Burkina Faso. This article reveals difficulties in the initiative's implementation, which resulted in the continued exclusion of poor people from health services. Poor people were required not only to make co‐payments, but also to accept a limitation of coverage to three episodes of illness per year. Additional challenges to service takeup were the geographical distance of the homes of some beneficiaries covered by a mutual fund agreement from a health centre and the failure by some health workers and managers of pharmacies to recognize the mutual membership card. A formal framework was lacking that brought together all the actors involved in planning and implementing the initiative. Those involved did not all have the same information. Each structure performed the tasks within its scope, according to its own interests, but without consulting the other parties, and there was no platform for discussing implementation difficulties

Acknowledgement · Action (physics · Business · Christian ministry · Economic growth · Economics · Mutual aid · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Service (business · Social protection · Solidarity · Global Maternal and Child Health · Healthcare Systems and Practices · Healthcare Systems and Reforms · Public Administration