Governance assessment of the public sector drug supply ... Inst. - Governance...PPDA – Public...

34
Basel Institute on Governance Steinenring 60 4051 Basel Switzerland Phone +41 (0)61 205 55 11 www.baselgovernance.org µ Governance Assessment of the Public Sector Drug Management System: Uganda _____________________________________________ Final Report on Short Term Consulting Services Commissioned to the Basel Institute on Governance, Basel, Switzerland by the Swedish Embassy, Kampala, Uganda. Contract Number CO1533 24 th May, 2011 Consultants: Dr. Claudia Baez-Camargo Ms. Pamela Kamujuni Basel Institute on Governance Consultant Human Rights and Good Governance Basel, Switzerland Kampala, Uganda

Transcript of Governance assessment of the public sector drug supply ... Inst. - Governance...PPDA – Public...

  •  

    Basel  Institute  on  Governance⏐Steinenring  60⏐4051  Basel⏐Switzerland⏐Phone  +41  (0)61  205  55  11⏐www.baselgovernance.orgµ  

     

         

               

    Governance Assessment of the Public Sector Drug Management System: Uganda _____________________________________________  Final Report on Short Term Consulting Services Commissioned to the Basel Institute on Governance, Basel, Switzerland by the Swedish Embassy, Kampala, Uganda. Contract Number CO1533  24th May, 2011  Consultants: Dr. Claudia Baez-Camargo Ms. Pamela Kamujuni Basel Institute on Governance Consultant Human Rights and Good Governance Basel, Switzerland Kampala, Uganda

    08  Fall  

  •      

      2  

     Table of Contents

    Abbreviations and Acronyms  ..........................................................................  3  

    Executive summary  ...........................................................................................  4  

    Background and motivation  ............................................................................  6  

    Framework, Approaches and Methodology  ................................................  7  

    Political background  ..........................................................................................  9  

    Overview of the Current Public Sector Drug Supply Chain: Institutions, Actors and Performance.  ...............................................................................  12  Performance and regulatory assessments results.  .........................................................................  15  Power and influence analysis  ....................................................................................................................  17  

    Systems Assessment and Identified Governance Risks  ..........................  18  Systems Assessment  .....................................................................................................................................  18  Identified Governance Risks  .......................................................................................................................  20  

    Lack of transparency and accountability at NMS  ..........................................................................  20  Leakages of drugs along the distribution line  .................................................................................  22  

    Assessment of governance processes: accountability, transparency and control of corruption  ...............................................................................  23  NMS Incentives/constraints accountability analysis  .......................................................................  23  Health Facility Workers: Incentives/constraints accountability analysis  ...............................  25  

    Suggested anticorruption and governance enhancing strategies for the Ugandan public sector drug supply chain  ...........................................  27  Excessive centralization of informal power: NMS  ............................................................................  28  Excessive fragmentation of formal power, human resources and preventing drug pilferage  ...............................................................................................................................................................  30  

    References  ........................................................................................................  33  

    Appendix 1  ........................................................................................................  34  List of Institutional Affiliations of Stakeholders Interviewed  ........................................................  34  

     

       

  • [Type  text]          

      3  

    Abbreviations and Acronyms ACTs – Artemisinin-based Combination Therapies

    ARVs – Antiretroviral drugs

    CAO – Chief Administrative Officer

    CDC – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

    CIA – Chief Internal Auditor

    CSOs – Civil Society Organizations

    DADIS – District Assistant Drug Inspectors

    DHO – District Health Officer

    DPs – Development Partners

    FGDs – Focus Group Discussions

    GF – Global Fund

    GM – General Manager

    HUMC – Health Unit Management Committee

    MeTA – Medicines Transparency Alliance

    MHSDMU – Medicines and Health Services Delivery Monitoring Unit

    MoE – Ministry of Education

    MoFPED – Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development

    MoH – Ministry of Health

    MoLG – Ministry of Local Government

    MoPS – Ministry of Public Service

    NDA – National Drug Authority

    NGO – Non-Governmental Organization

    NMS - National Medical Stores

    OAG – Office of the Auditor General

    PPDA – Public Procurement and Disposal Agency

    PSU - Pharmaceutical Society of Uganda

     

  •      

      4  

    Executive summary  

    This report reflects the results of a study, commissioned to the Basel Institute on Governance by the

    Swedish Embassy in Kampala, aimed at assessing governance risks in the Ugandan public sector

    drug supply chain under the new institutional arrangements in place since November 2009. The

    assessment was conducted following the framework to assess governance of health systems

    developed by the Health Governance team at the Basel Institute on Governance in collaboration with

    the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute. This approach emphasizes the need to address both

    formal and informal determinants to governance through political economy as well as power and

    influence analysis.

    Methods used included desk review of the relevant literature covering the Ugandan Health system

    as well as political economy analyses of the Ugandan case, semi-structured interviews with a broad

    range of non-state stakeholders and focus group discussions with patients and patient advocacy

    group representatives, and with a broad range of health service providers.

    The starting point has been to place the assessment of the public sector drug supply chain against

    the backdrop of a political regime where political power is heavily centralized around the figure of

    the president, and where the decentralized structure of the state has worked to support extensive

    patronage networks.

    While all evidence suggests that accessibility of essential medicines at public health facilities has

    improved under the new system, power and influence analysis revealed distorted accountability

    lines due to the informal centralization of power in the National Medical Stores (NMS) and its

    leadership. Furthermore, institutional and stakeholder analysis revealed two areas of increased

    governance risk: lack of accountability and transparency at NMS and leakages of drugs along the

    distribution line.

    Analysis of embedded institutional and political incentives suggested a situation that can be

    characterized as a vicious circle where NMS leadership is confronted by criticism and questioning

    from multiple angles, which In turn create incentives to close in and avoid sharing critical

    information, which in turn generates further suspicions and criticism.

  • [Type  text]          

      5  

    Governance weaknesses along the distribution line are, in turn, associated with a mix of negative

    incentives faced by health staff at public facilities. These negative incentives include low

    remuneration, lack of career advancement prospects, poor monitoring, as well as a profit motive

    associated with the elevated prices at which stolen drugs are often sold in unlicensed pharmacies.

    The suggested anticorruption and governance strengthening strategies to address lack of

    accountability at NMS involve trust-building measures at different levels and among different actors.

    These include a recognition that the current institutional arrangements governing the drug supply

    chain are yielding results and should be supported, a clear joint statement on the part of the

    relevant stakeholders on which indicators and data exactly would be required from NMS to improve

    on transparency, as well as the continued development of creative partnerships to create and

    implement better technical procedures.

    In terms of addressing drug leakages along the distribution line this report concludes that a

    comprehensive reform would be required in order to generate adequate incentives to health facility

    staff. This should not only involve better remuneration and career opportunities, but also effective

    methods of community-based monitoring and better regulation of the private pharmaceutical

    market.

       

  •      

      6  

    Background and motivation  

    In November 2009 significant changes were decreed that modified the way the Ugandan public

    sector medicine supply chain operates. The major change consisted in the centralization of a large

    proportion of the budget for drugs and medicine supplies, and the pre-financing of the National

    Medical Stores (NMS).1 Thus NMS, a parastatal corporation mandated with the procurement, storage

    and distribution of drugs and medical supplies for the public health sector, was given direct

    decision-making authority over a large proportion of the funds allocated to drugs and medical

    supplies in the Ugandan public health sector budget.

    The policy change came in the context of severe criticism and public outrage over widespread stock

    outs of even the most basic drugs and supplies at health facilities (see, for example, Njoroge and

    Lister 2009). Furthermore, drugs intended for public facilities were often found for sale at inflated

    prices in private pharmacies, adding to the perception of gross mismanagement and corruption

    along the drug management system.

    By centralizing the budget and decision making power along the medicine supply chain, it was

    expected that efficiency gains would be achieved, ultimately leading to a more coherent and

    streamlined system where essential drugs and medical supplies would be more accessible to

    Ugandans at public health facilities.

    After a year and a half since the policy change, the question of whether and how the new system

    has improved on the previous situation still requires conclusive answers. While some technical

    reviews assessing regulatory quality (World Bank Institute 2010) as well as performance reports

    (Medicines and Health Service Delivery Monitoring Unit 2010) have been released, more insights are

    still required to fully understand the consequences of the policy change.

    In light of the above, the Swedish Embassy in Kampala commissioned the Basel Institute on

    Governance to undertake an assessment of the new system governing the operations of the

    Ugandan public sector medicine supply chain. This study has the objective of evaluating the current

    system for governance risks by focusing on both the formal and informal determinants of systemic

    implementation and performance, following the methodology developed by the Basel Institute on

                                                                                                                   1  These funds were previously allocated to local governments.

  • [Type  text]          

      7  

    Governance health governance team. The focus is on the underlying political constraints to

    improving governance and involves political power and influence analysis. That analysis informs and

    underpins suggested anticorruption and governance-enhancing strategies. It is hoped that this

    analysis can inform development partners and civil society organizations sharing the interest and

    goal of improving the overall performance of the medicine supply chain and ultimately improving

    access to essential drugs for Ugandans.

    The opinions expressed in this report are the sole responsibility of the consultants and in no way

    represent the position of the Swedish Embassy or the Basel Institute on Governance.

    Framework, Approaches and Methodology  

    This assessment has been conducted following the framework to assess governance of health

    systems that has been developed by the Health Governance team at the Basel Institute on

    Governance in collaboration with the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute.

    This analytical approach is based on the conviction that to correctly assess the performance of the

    formal institutions of the health systems in low income countries it is necessary to address both the

    formal and the informal dimensions underpinning the actions of the key stakeholders involved. For

    this reason the methodology involves political power and influence analysis that goes beyond the

    technical assessment of rules and regulations in the health sector. The methodology involves

    institutional and stakeholder mapping that incorporates insights into who the powerful players are

    and what motivates them to behave as they do. These considerations are considered essential for

    the design of successful anti-corruption strategies as reflected in the latest literature on the topic

    (See for example, Hussman 2011, 7).

     

    In this framework, which is depicted in Figure 1., we have divided the components of good

    governance into three groups:

  •      

      8  

    1. Governance inputs: these refer to how and by whom are the institutions and rules governing the

    health system constructed.2 This level of analysis provides the necessary information for an

    adequate systemic level assessment of the institutions of the health sector.

    2. Governance processes: these are basic attributes characterizing the implementation of

    technical and administrative procedures within the health sector.3 A power and influence

    analysis is undertaken for the assessment of governance gaps in order to provide insights into

    the incentives and constraints to action of the major stakeholders, which ultimately underpin

    observed performance.

    3. Governance outcomes: these refer to positive qualities that health system outputs should

    generate once rules and processes have been designed and implemented.4

     

    1

    Figure  1Analytical  Framework  for  Governance  of  Health  Systems

       

                                                                                                                   2 Analyzing governance inputs entails answering the following questions: Who are the stakeholders involved in defining and designing health policy? (participation) To what extent do government and state officials incorporate other stakeholders into goal setting and policy design for public health decisions? (consensus orientation). Are the health policy instruments commensurate and coherent to the achievement of the stated goals? (strategic vision and policy design). 3 The governance processes emphasized in this framework are accountability, transparency and control of corruption, all three of which are closely interrelated. The presumption being that, if accountability is improved, then corruption is diminished and agents are induced to be transparent in their actions. 4 The governance-associated outcomes that are emphasized in this framework are: responsiveness of the health system to the needs of the population, equitable access of all groups to health services, and efficiency in the use of resources.  

  • [Type  text]          

      9  

    The data collection required to carry out this analysis was obtained through a mixed methods

    approach including:

    • Desk review of the literature covering the Ugandan Health system as well as political

    economy analyses of the Ugandan case.

    • In depth semi-structured interviews with a broad range of non-state stakeholders with links

    to the Ugandan health system.5

    • Focus group discussions (FGDs) with patients and patient advocacy group representatives,

    and with a broad range of health service providers.6

    Political background  After nearly 30 years of autocratic rule and civil war, Uganda returned to elective national

    government in 1996. But while elections resumed and political parties were allowed to exist there

    remained serious legal impediments to the real functioning of a democratic system (Mattes, Kibirige,

    and Sentamu 2010, 3). Until today, Uganda can be characterised as an “imperfect” democracy.

    Freedom House characterises the country as being “partly free” and definitely not an electoral

    democracy (Freedom House). Furthermore, popular perception of fairness of elections has

    registered a steady fall since 1996 (Mattes, Kibirige, and Sentamu 2010, 5). This year, popular unrest

    and demonstrations after the presidential elections of 18 February have further underscored this

    trend.

    One of the characteristics of the Ugandan political regime is, in fact, the extreme centralization of

    power in the person of the president. In an article in the Journal of Democracy, Andrew Mwenda

    wrote: “The worst obstacle to democratic development in Uganda has been the personalization of

    the state” (Mwenda 2007, 28). According to some research, enormous constraints on civil and

    political liberties persist in Uganda, whose rulers have only gone as far with political reforms as they

    have felt they have needed to in order to satisfy domestic and donor pressures (Tripp 2004).

    The Ugandan political regime can be described along the common traits it shares with other

    authoritarian systems. Typically, authoritarian regimes maintain power by a mixture of negative

    incentives to opposition groups (ranging from outright repression to more subtle control

                                                                                                                   5 A list of the interviews conducted can be found in Appendix 1. This list is limited to institutional affiliations to protect the privacy of the individuals who collaborated in this study. 6 FGDs were held at the Hotel Triangle in Kampala on the 10th May 2011.

  •      

      10  

    mechanisms) and positive incentives to supporters (ranging from maintaining basic security in post-

    conflict settings to actual material benefits and rewards through patronage), the latter of which

    ultimately generate a measure of legitimacy that allows perpetuation in power.

    In terms of negative incentives, intimidation and repression of opposition groups and movements

    has been and continues to be a common occurrence in Uganda as the post electoral events this

    year have shown. The effect of this, according to evidence from research on Ugandan human rights

    organizations, has been to promote a generalized culture of apathy and fear (Dicklitch and Lwanga

    2003). Some other constraints over opposition and dissent are, however, more subtle. For example,

    every year each NGO is expected to renew its registration on the NGO board. This is a mechanism to

    regulate NGOs, de facto compromising the extent to which they can demand accountability from the

    authorities. During the focus group discussions conducted in this study, representatives of patient

    advocacy organizations mentioned that they are quite limited in how they can approach the official

    health institutions because there is always the threat that whomever is too vociferous will lose their

    registration.

    In terms of positive incentives, the fact of the existence of widespread patronage networks was

    pointed out in numerous occasions during the interviews conducted for this study. The existence of

    these networks should be understood as stemming from a very clear political need for sustained

    bases of support and their tenacity is therefore not to be underestimated.

    One informant suggested that democracy is problematic in Uganda because it creates additional

    incentives for patronage networks to be sought after and reinforced because they represent a

    mechanism to generate votes. The Ugandan median voter is illiterate, uneducated and poor, making

    it very difficult to vote on an abstract political platform. Therefore, many voters will cast their ballot

    for whomever gives them handouts that satisfy immediate needs. From the government’s

    standpoint, public office and public goods can be allocated to powerful ethnic and regional groups

    so they in turn can mobilize support to the regime.

    Along the same lines, it was suggested by some of the stakeholders consulted that decentralization

    is a feature of the Ugandan state that contributes to facilitating the distribution of patronage at local

    levels. As one analyst argued “with each new district came a raft of government jobs, each one a

    patronage opportunity”(Mwenda 2007, 32).

  • [Type  text]          

      11  

    This assertion finds further backing on published research claiming that administrative and fiscal

    decentralization combined with the emergence of multiparty politics have negatively affected local

    government effectiveness and solvency in Uganda (Manyak and Katono 2011).

    Another consulted stakeholder, who has extensive experience working with communities and

    grassroots organizations, pointed out that precisely because of the existence of patronage

    networks, it is extremely difficult to discern who is the most powerful person at the district level. It

    actually varies significantly from district to district. The actual observed dynamics, this informant

    concluded, are a function of individuals, not of institutions. In this sense it becomes apparent how

    the prevalence of informal clientelistic networks generates substantial challenges for policy

    implementation.

    An important consideration, however, is that these institutional malfunctions nevertheless perform a

    political function. Institutional fragmentation has become an ally of personal rule as the

    fragmentation ensures that no large and effective movement or institution will arise to form a

    competing centre of power.

    Thus, patronage networks, while providing bases for political support and legitimacy to the regime,

    simultaneously undermine state capacity to deliver public goods and also hinder the prospects for

    genuine democratization because citizens are incorporated into the political system as clients and

    not as right bearers.

    This state of affairs in the wider political context sets the stage for the challenges to effective

    governance reforms in Uganda. While undoubtedly complex and sensitive, these political realities

    should be taken into consideration while designing anti corruption and governance enhancing

    reforms if they are to have real political viability and sustainability.

         

  •      

      12  

    Overview of the Current Public Sector Drug Supply Chain: Institutions,

    Actors and Performance.      

    Organizational structure of the public sector drug supply chain7

     

    The Ministry of Health (MoH) is the overall responsible entity for national planning and policy

    formulation, setting standards and guidelines, capacity building, training, monitoring and evaluation,

    provision of technical support and mobilization for the health sector.

    The National Medical Stores (NMS), an autonomous government corporation, is the lead agency for

    public sector procurement, storage and distribution of pharmaceuticals in Uganda. In order to

    safeguard its distributive equity role and ensure that it has a sufficient market to enable it to

    breakeven, the NMS has been given a monopoly to supply all public health institutions.

    It should be mentioned that, while NMS operates at the center of the medicines supply system,

    authority and control over Uganda‘s Medicines Supply System rests with the Ministry of Health. An

    overview of the institutional setup for this system is depicted in Figure 2.

    The following institutions directly influence NMS procurement:

    a) The Public Procurement & Disposal Agency (PPDA) is the main regulatory body in Uganda

    involved in procurement across all sectors.

    b) The National Drug Authority (NDA) has the mandate to ensure that the drugs available in the

    market are of the right quality, safety and efficacy through the regulation and control of

    their production, importation, distribution and use. NDA works closely with NMS since it

    regulates what medicines are to be included in Essential Medicines List and can therefore

    be procured in Uganda. NDA also inspects every manufacturer for which a tender is granted

    and is also responsible for licensing pharmacies.

                                                                                                                   7 Since other reports have already described the current medicine supply management system in detail (World Bank Institute 2010)(Medicines Transparency Alliance 2010)(Office of the Auditor General 2010), this section omits discussion of regulations and technical aspects. The emphasis here is rather on describing the roles and responsibilities of the main institutional stakeholders that are involved in different aspects of the performance of the medicine supply chain.      

  • [Type  text]          

      13  

    The procurement process of drugs and medical supplies in the public sector begins with a needs

    assessment, carried out every six months by NMS, and which consists in the calculation of Average

    Monthly Consumption. For every procurement, after availability of funds has been certified, a

    procurement method is decided upon, tender and bid documents prepared and submitted to the

    contracts committee for approval. The rest of the procurement procedures up to receipt of goods

    are done in accordance with the “NMS Procurement and Disposal Manual, December 2004” and

    PPDA rules and regulations. Once a tender is awarded, NMS instructs the Ministry of Finance

    Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) to make direct disbursements to the pharmaceutical

    supplier. 8 Medicines are purchased accordingly and stored centrally.9

    NMS distributes medicines to Public Health Facilities10 through two different mechanisms:

    i) Push system with kits composed of a pre-specified number and mix of essential drugs and medical

    supplies. These kits are sent by NMS every two months to health centres II and III.11 It should be

    noted that until very recently NMS delivered these kits to the District Health Offices (DHOs), who

    were then in charge of delivering to the health facilities under their jurisdiction. However, on March

    31st 2011 it was announced that NMS would, from then on, deliver directly to the health facilities

    (Ssebuyira 2011).

    ii) Health centres IV and hospitals obtain their medicines from NMS through a pull system where

    each facility is responsible to quantify their own needs and place their orders accordingly. District

    hospitals and referral hospitals can also receive drugs directly from donors or procure from

    recommended private pharmacies (Office of the Auditor General 2010).

    Several bodies undertake monitoring activities over the performance of NMS centrally as well as

    along the drug distribution chain.

                                                                                                                   8 One common misconception was the belief that NMS itself controls the medicines budget, while in reality the funds remain with the Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED). NMS does the procurement and instructs MoFPED to pay the manufacturer once the tender is awarded. MoFPED only gives NMS an overhead, which is a percentage of the total funds available for medicines (around 15%). In addition to that, NMS also receives direct budget support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 9 NMS also receives medical supplies procured by health development partners, which it then stores and distributes based on delivery schedules prepared by the HDPs. 10 Public health facilities can only procure drugs from NMS unless NMS provides them with a certificate of non-availability. 11 Health centers IV may order for additional medicines for HF II and III under their jurisdiction

     

  •      

      14  

    Figure 2.

    Institutional Mapping of the Ugandan Public Sector Drug Supply Chain

     

     

     

    Key: Financial flows

    Medicine flows

    Monitoring and oversight

    Regulatory authority

    Informal political influence

  • [Type  text]          

      15  

    -‐ The Ministry of Health (MoH), having the formal and ultimate responsibility for ensuring

    continuous distribution of drugs across the public health sector, has the ability to call NMS

    into account through on going monitoring of its activities.

    -‐ The Chief Internal Auditor (CIA) within NMS, which carries out pre audits of all financial

    transactions, verifies receipts and payments, and reviews internal controls systems.

    -‐ The Office of the Auditor General (OAG), which performs financial and value for money

    audits.

    -‐ The Medicines and Health Service Delivery Monitoring Unit (MHSDMU), created in 2009 as

    an autonomous entity directly under the President’s office. Its mandate is to improve

    performance of health services by monitoring the management of essential medicines and

    services delivery.

    The last link in the medicine supply chain is at the health facility level, which is ultimately the

    interface for patients to access the drugs procured centrally. In Uganda, health service delivery is

    decentralized at the district level, with district authorities under the oversight of the Ministry of Local

    Government (MoLG).

    Before the policy change, the budget for medicines was under the control of the District Chief

    Administrative Officer (CAO), and managed by the District Health Officer (DHO). While these funds

    have now been centralized, districts continue to have responsibility over health services and it is not

    clear whether formal coordination mechanisms between NMS and DHOs exist to ensure efficient

    outcomes. Finally, at the local level Health Unit Management Committees (HUMCs) are meant to

    represent the voice of patients and are expected to witness the arrival of medicines and ensure that

    they actually reach the community (Economic Policy Research Centre 2009).

    Performance and regulatory assessments results.  

    In order to give proper context to any assessment of the current system, a starting point is to

    acknowledge that the system is underfunded. This is the first and foremost issue underpinning

    governance weaknesses in the system.12 For this reason it is difficult to exactly determine the extent

    to which observed performance weaknesses are caused by lack of resources, inefficiencies or

    corruption.

                                                                                                                   12 MOH has stated its ability to finance 32% of the Minimum Care Package leaving the remainder up to local communities. See (Medicines and Health Service Delivery Monitoring Unit)

  •      

      16  

    Through consultation with a broad range of stakeholders in the non-state sector, a clear consensus

    emerged on an observed improvement in availability of medicines at public health facilities since the

    change of policy took effect. This was the appreciation from Development Partners, Multi-

    stakeholder groups, Civil Society Organizations, groups of patients and patient advocacy

    organizations as well as health practitioners.

    Published reports and quantitative data seem to support this perception:

    In their annual report 2010 MHSDMU found that since the change of policy the availability had

    improved for HC II and III. Also that “embossing of government medicines had, to some extent,

    reduced medicines/supplies diversion to private clinics.”

    Similarly, the Medicine Price Monitor for October-December 2010 reports that there was “a marked

    increase in availability of medicines in the public sector which may indicate that changes in the

    medicine supply policy that were effected in 2009 to improve efficiency of the National Medical

    Stores are paying off at higher levels of health care […] compared to the previous quarter (Apr-Jun

    2010) there was in increase of 11% (to 70%) in medicine availability in the pubic sector. Also that

    availability of medicines in rural facilities was higher in this survey compared to previous surveys.

    (Uganda Country Working Group 2010).13

    In terms of assessments of regulatory quality in NMS the consensus seems to be that the rules and

    regulations governing the procurement of drugs and medical supplies at NMS are sound and,

    generally speaking, up to international best practice standards:

    According to MeTA (Medicines Transparency Alliance 2010) many of the regulations for adequate

    procurement are in place: There is a tender committee overseeing public procurement that is

    independent from the procurement office. Suppliers for public procurement are prequalified using

    explicit criteria and a list of prequalified suppliers and those who failed is available upon request.

    Public sector tenders and winning bids are publicly available. However there is no electronic bidding

    process. Results of quality testing during procurement are available on request.

                                                                                                                   13 Medicine price monitor looks at the availability of 40 medicines but only reports on Health Centres level IV and hospitals.

     

  • [Type  text]          

      17  

    The World Bank Institute (2010) assessment concluded that Uganda possesses a sound legal and

    regulatory framework surrounding procurement, and in the past decade has done much to

    strengthen and build upon this framework through reform and development.

    In spite of the above, the literature as well as the stakeholder consultations revealed continued

    inefficiencies along the drug supply chain. Because other reports have elaborated on these and they

    are beyond the scope of this study they will not be touched upon extensively here. Suffice to say

    that suboptimal results linked to inadequate estimation of needs, rigid procurement regulations as

    well as logistical and drug tracking shortcomings remain in need to be addressed.

    Power and influence analysis

    A strong consensus stemming from the stakeholder consultations refers to where in the drug supply

    management system political power and influence reside. It was a generalised appreciation that the

    two most powerful agencies and players in the institutional setting described above are NMS and its

    General Manager, and the MHSDMU and its director. It was considered that the main source for the

    influence of these two individuals, and thus of their respective institutions, was a direct line of

    communication with State House and enjoying the confidence of the President himself.14 In addition,

    NMS has become unquestionably more powerful as a result of the very substantial budget that has

    been put under its control.

    Another point on which there was overall consensus was the fact that the MoH has lost much

    influence in the health sector generally and in matters relating to the drug supply chain specifically.

    Frequently mentioned was the fact that relations between NMS and MoH are quite strained at the

    moment, permeated by mistrust and lack of communication. NMS, it was described by one

    interviewee, “does not listen to the MoH anymore.” Furthermore, stakeholder consultations also

    suggested MoH has been additionally sidestepped because the policy change has entailed that the

    actual accountability incentives of NMS are now directed towards MoFPED, which retains control

    over the budget for drugs.

    Finally, it was also widely perceived that DHOs are the other actors to have lost most in terms of

    power and influence as a result of the policy change. DHOs have lost budget and are being now

    sidestepped in terms of deliveries of medicines while nonetheless retaining responsibility for

                                                                                                                   14  For instance, it is well known that the director of the MHSDMU is a close relative of the president.

  •      

      18  

    performance at the district level. However, in interviews there was the perception that DHOs, if

    organized, could represent a powerful force for change. One to which even the highest levels of

    political power would be receptive.

    Down the distribution line, at the sub-district level, as was discussed above in the political analysis,

    the implementing abilities of the state diminish and as also do the influence and empowerment of

    stakeholders. Health staffs at the point of service delivery operate at a level where power is most

    atomized. Also, at the end of the line, it would not be a misrepresentation to say that patients, the

    group with the biggest stake when availability of essential medicines is involved, are among the least

    able to exert influence on the system.

    Systems Assessment and Identified Governance Risks

    Systems Assessment  The institutional and power and influence analyses point to systemic inadequacies impacting the

    performance of the drug supply chain due to the confluence of an extreme fragmentation of formal

    decision making power and structures combined with an informal excessive centralization of power

    in a few actors, especially within NMS.

    One of the most obvious manifestations of the formal fragmentation of power and decision making

    authority is decentralization. Decentralization has often been portrayed as a mechanism to increase

    responsiveness in public service provision by brining decision makers closer to the public and

    facilitating greater accountability at the district and community levels. This, however, is not

    necessarily the case where the state implementing and monitoring capacities are compromised by,

    for example, informal patronage networks.

    In the Ugandan case, the president’s policy of decentralization has been quite extreme. The country

    went from having 33 districts in 1990 to 112 in 2010 (Nakayi 2010). This decentralization, while

    serving clear political purposes as described before, is problematic for at least two other reasons: it

    creates problems for the implementation of national policies and it weakens service delivery through

    its effect on human resources at the local level.

    On the first problem, extreme decentralization creates implementation, monitoring and enforcement

    problems for national level authorities. A clear example is the case of the National Drug Authority

    (NDA). This agency plays a critical role in relation to drug leakages to the private sector as it

  • [Type  text]          

      19  

    regulates and licences pharmacies, but it suffers from severe understaffing and lack of institutional

    capability to fully perform their functions. There are 1000 sub counties in the country, but NDA has 7

    regional centres with an average of 2 staff members per regional office. Thus, they use District

    Assistant Drug Inspectors (DADIS), who are employed by local governments (not NDA staff), to help

    inspect pharmacies. However, DADIS have been characterized as overwhelmed staff, who have

    other duties and responsibilities, they are not paid to perform those inspections, and thus have very

    little incentives to do so.

    In a similar assessment of decentralization and systemic fragmentation of decision-making and

    authority, a 2009 World Bank report concluded that:

    “Under decentralization, the proliferation of districts is adversely affecting the capacity of districts to

    deliver services concurrent with the increasing demand for health resources (both monetary and

    personnel). Human resource management in the health sector depends on a separate agency – the

    Ministry of Public Services (MoPS), which provides oversight of all civil servants as well as public

    employees. Beyond the typical focus on public schools, the Ministry of Education (MoE) also

    supervises the education and training of health workers”(Hoffman and Namakula 2009, 6).

    This observation already points to the fact that fragmentation of formal decision-making power is

    not limited to the more decentralized administrative levels. At the national (ministerial) level decision

    making lines are also often fragmented and /or blurred. The observation applies also to the decision

    making process in Uganda’s health sector, which is frequently interrupted, particularly when it

    comes to budget allocations, procurement, appointments and recruitments. More specifically, the

    MoH lacks effective means for coordinating with other public sectors, such as Public Service and

    Local Government ministries. The MoH also lacks a clear communication strategy and the capacity

    to communicate their vision with other stakeholders to ensure effective implementation.”(Hoffman

    and Namakula 2009, 7)

    The decentralization of the Ugandan system also has detrimental effects on health workers. As

    pointed out by one of the stakeholders interviewed, the decentralized structure of health service

    delivery prevents health workers from developing long-term career paths. Decentralization not only

    means workers are confined to working in one district only, but also that there is only so far they can

    potentially advance up the district hierarchy after which point career opportunities effectively stop.

  •      

      20  

    As it was characterized by one insider: decentralization is an institutional challenge and an obstacle

    to meaningful reform because is part of the mechanisms through which the regime and its political

    constituencies can maintain their own patronage networks, which are in turn an important source of

    power at the local level.

    The other element that has systemic impact over the medicine supply chain is the centralization of

    informal power. One of the consequences of such centralization of political power in NMS that came

    through in many of the stakeholder consultations is that it negatively affects the stewardship abilities

    of MoH, which is formally charged with setting the national health goals, policies and instruments. In

    theory NMS is accountable to the Pharmaceuticals unit at MoH, but in practice NMS is basically

    operating on its own. The relationship between NMS and MoH is permeated by mistrust and

    unwillingness to cooperate.15

    An aggravating factor is lack of clarity. For example, there was confusion among stakeholders about

    the existence (or lack thereof) of a MoU determining division of roles and responsibilities in the new

    scheme between MoH, NMS and MoFPED. As it appears, there is such a MoU but has not been

    made known, it is unclear whether this is still a draft version or a final one and very little is known

    about it contents. Lack of clear, reliable information about who should be doing what in the

    decision-making processes affecting the drug supply chain is undoubtedly an element facilitating

    discretionary exercise of centralized informal power.

    Identified Governance Risks  Two major sources of concern in terms of governance weaknesses were identified in the literature

    as well as in the consultations with stakeholders undertaken for this report: 1) lack of transparency

    and accountability at NMS and 2) continued leakages of drugs along the distribution line and

    frequent reports of public sector drugs being sold in private pharmacies. Both are analysed and

    discussed next.

    Lack of transparency and accountability at NMS  Firstly, it is important to be clear that, from all available reports and audits as well as from the

    consulted stakeholders’ knowledge and experiences, there is no evidence suggesting grand scale

                                                                                                                   15  It was mentioned that NMS views MoH officials as inefficient and lacking integrity. Furthermore, it was suggested that suspicions go as far as NMS questioning the validity of SURE data stocks reports, while at the same time failing to produce its own.

  • [Type  text]          

      21  

    corruption taking place as a consequence of the centralization of the medicines and supplies budget

    under the control of NMS.

    Rather, the criticism expressed is based mostly on observation of continued inefficiencies, many of

    which could presumably be attributed to lack of adequate implementation of rules. For example, it is

    widely reported that health facilities often receive items they did not ask for and which poorly match

    the disease burden afflicting their communities. In a representative comment of the types of

    criticism that were voiced during stakeholder consultations, pharmacists and other health

    professionals participating in the FGDs expressed the opinion that it would be good for NMS to share

    their quantification of needs estimates with professionals in the field before tenders came out.

    Therefore, the concerns expressed have to do mainly with lack of information about the internal

    processes that give rise to those inefficiencies in NMS performance.

    An interviewee said that some of the observed problems at NMS might actually stem from decision-

    making aimed to gain efficiency and value for money but without proper technical expertise on what

    is best practice and how to deal with the protocols of funding agencies. For example, it was

    mentioned that recently NMS made a decision on procuring for ACTs which involved ordering only

    the larger 24-pill packs (cheaper than paediatric doses) assuming that health facility staff could go

    ahead and split up the contents before dispensing according to need based on patient’s age etc.

    Global Fund found this unacceptable and the GF procurement (R4) was rejected.

    One issue that some stakeholders brought up relates to the adjudication by MoFPED of a

    substantive budget for ARVs and ACTs that needs be procured from one single source: Quality

    Chemicals Industries. Quality Chemicals is a Ugandan Pharmaceutical company, which was partly

    owned by the Ugandan government until recently. However, stakeholders complained about the

    lack of information on what is the price at which these medicines are procured. One interviewed

    stakeholder said tenders adjudicated to Quality Chemicals involved prices usually between 50-70%

    above international market prices. While this deviates from international best practice, it has been

    an open and transparent decision made by the government in order to promote the development of

    a national pharmaceutical industry.

    In sum, the concerns expressed about NMS’s performance were mostly about the lack access to

    crucial information such as procured prices; methodology used for needs assessment and generally

    financial accountability with regards to the recentralized budget. Criticism was also recorded on a

  •      

      22  

    lack of responsiveness on the part of NMS to complaints made by hospitals in the sense that there

    are no feedback mechanisms through which misplaced or faulty orders can be reported and

    returned. Overall, there was the impression that NMS has become a closed, tightly guarded entity. .

    Generally speaking, the consensus is that it is extremely hard to obtain information from NMS.16

    Leakages of drugs along the distribution line  Reports on missing and unaccounted drugs continue to be a source of concern and a reflection of

    weak governance especially towards the end of the distribution line. As mentioned before, the

    extent to which missing drugs are a result of outright corruption or of inefficiencies in the system is

    difficult to establish with precision.

    Indeed, efforts are being made on several fronts to develop better and more efficacious tracking

    systems that should help to simultaneously reduce inefficiencies and identify pilferage.17

    In any case, the fact that government embossed drugs still continue to show up for sale in private

    pharmacies where on going prices are reported to be much higher than their market value is a clear

    indication that corruption along the distribution line continues to be a real concern.18

    The crucial element along the distribution line to be identified here is human resources. An

    understanding of what and how determines the incentives of the staff involved in the distribution,

    storage and dispensing of drugs in public facilities is a prerequisite to address the issue of leakages

    and shall be given due attention below.

    This section so far has described the formal aspects and main actors in the current system for

    procurement and distribution of drugs in the Ugandan public sector. Two main instances of

    governance weaknesses were identified along the system through a broad stakeholder consultation

    process. In order to allow adequate analysis and provide a deeper understanding of the

    underpinnings of those two governance “red flag” areas, the following section presents an analysis

                                                                                                                   16 An expression of this can be very easily verified simply by visiting NMS’s webpage, which has fields designed to provide information on budget, suppliers, national price survey among others, but are all empty displaying a note reading “No information has yet been uploaded” http://www.natmedstores.org/, last accessed 23 May, 2011. 17 For example the Ugandan Government in collaboration with the SURE programme is developing a monitoring system to track deliveries from district stores to Health Centres. WHO and UNICEF, with funding from DFID, are putting forward a pilot to track drugs using sms technology. 18 A different but certainly related problem that appears to very widespread is that when the delivery truck arrives with medicines at the lower level health facilities, patients (real and potential ones) flock the facilities trying (and many times succeeding) to take medicines when they are available in order to stock up for when sickness strikes and the health facility might be out of stock. Needless to say this lack of trust in the future availability of medicaments results in a self-fulfilling prophecy where entire supplies are depleted within a couple of days.

  • [Type  text]          

      23  

    of the embedded incentives to accountable (or non-accountable) behaviour stakeholders in those

    governance risk areas face.

    Assessment of governance processes: accountability, transparency and control of corruption  This section analyses the incentives and constraints to action of the key agents at the two previously

    identified critical areas for governance risks. It begins with the analysis for the case of NMS followed

    by the analysis for health facility staff.

    NMS Incentives/constraints accountability analysis  A first appraisal is that the NMS General Manager (GM) appears to be operating under substantial

    criticism and political pressure. This is because, as many of the stakeholders consulted for this

    report brought up, centralization of the budget for medicines was an abrupt and unilateral

    presidential decision, brought about without consultation and against the will of important

    stakeholders. For this reason, the success of NMS under the new policy is viewed by many as a

    function of the personal relation of the GM with the president.

    This sets the context for a situation in which NMS performance is being under scrutiny by, first and

    foremost, those stakeholders whose power diminished as a result of the policy change (i.e. MoH

    and DHOs), but also from civil society and patient advocacy organizations, donors, and health

    practitioners.19

    Furthermore, strong criticism of NMS performance has been also expressed in several official

    assessments and reports. For example, the MHSDMU’s annual report for 2010 concluded that under

    the new system “Medical supplies largely do not seem to reflect an appreciation of the disease

    burden” (Medicines and Health Service Delivery Monitoring Unit, 33).20 Further corroborating this

    situation the Auditor General’s “Value for Money Audit Report on Procurement and Storage of Drugs

    by National Medical Stores” harshly criticised NMS’ inability to adequately quantify needs concluding

    that “the result of this situation was perpetual stock deficiency at health centres resulting from

                                                                                                                   19 There was even mention by one of the stakeholders consulted for this assessment that there had been a letter from the president recently expressing concern about NMS performance. 20 It should be said that some mismatch between needs and supplies is to be expected in a push system. Several of the

    stakeholders consulted acknowledged this and agreed the push system makes sense as a first step to increase availability on the ground but also should bee seen as a transitory measure with the longer term goal of training HC II and III staff to properly file orders according to needs.

  •      

      24  

    NMS’s failure to meet customers’ orders” (Office of the Auditor General 2010, 19).21

    The media has further politicized the issue. New Vision, for example, reported on the findings of the

    OAG report in a very negative light, saying that “The Auditor General's report on National Medical

    Stores (NMS) has embarrassing revelations that can only be described as obscene” (New Vision

    2010). The article went on to inform “In an opinion poll conducted by New Vision recently, the

    respondents indicated that the shortage of drugs in government health facilities was one of their

    most pressing problems that politicians must address while campaigning for the 2011 elections.”

    Thus giving prominence to the results of the audit to make a political statement in the context of a

    sensitive electoral campaign.

    The incentives faced by NMS management are also dictated by a political context in which policy

    decisions may be taken unilaterally and abruptly (like the pre-financing of NMS itself). This political

    scenario generates pressure to perform, especially if it is indeed the case that the president has

    expressed doubt about performance of NMS.

    Another issue potentially impacting the incentives facing NMS is that several stakeholders consulted

    shared the view that the pre-existing institutional capabilities at NMS have been in all likelihood

    overwhelmed by the sudden and substantial increase in budget and drug quantities it is meant to

    manage. A major problem reported is that the causes for observed inefficiencies cannot be

    identified as long as NMS remains closed to open scrutiny. Practitioners’ and pharmacists’

    representatives argued that their input could be valuable to improve efficiencies at NMS given their

    technical knowledge and exposure in the field. However, as one interviewee said: “NMS does not

    like to ask for help.”

    This situation suggests the NMS GM would be especially concerned about disclosing information on

    less-than-optimal outcomes or inefficient procedures that could potentially be used as evidence to

    generate pressures to revert the pre-financing policy decision. There is no evidence stemming from

    discussions among non-state stakeholders that there is a desire to push for that. To the contrary,

    most of the consulted stakeholders asserted that in fact the policy change seemed a reasonable

    one. However, the response and signals received from NMS and its GM in reaction to the intention

                                                                                                                   21 It should be noted that some of the information used by the OAG’s report dates as far back as FYs 2006/7 and 2007/8, well before the system change and therefore some of the implications of the findings cannot be attributed to the actual system.

  • [Type  text]          

      25  

    behind this assessment would suggest that there is in fact concern within NMS about other

    stakeholders seeking to reverse the policy.

    Thus, NMS general management, faced with suspicion and pressure from stakeholders coming from

    above, below and horizontally, has reacted by closing up about internal procedures and

    performance indicators.

    In sum, the situation can be characterized as a vicious circle in which the more NMS closes itself to

    outside scrutiny, the more suspicions are generated among other stakeholders, and the greater the

    incentives to NMS to keep potentially inefficient internal procedures, and performance indicators

    away from outside scrutiny. This in turn perpetuates the suspicions and mistrust of other actors.

    Health Facility Workers: Incentives/constraints accountability analysis  Health workers, especially at the facility level, are key actors with regards to issues of drug leakages

    and pilferage. For this reason, in order to properly address corruption and governance risks at this

    level in the health system, an evaluation of workers’ incentives and constraints to action is essential.

    A survey conducted among health workers by the MHSDMU revealed that at the top of the list of

    concerns for this group quite unequivocally were money and career progression. On these two

    aspects, however, the prospects of an average health worker in Uganda are quite grim. Although

    government increased the salary of lower medical staff recently, their pay remains among one of the

    lowest in East Africa. According also to the MHSDMU report: A number of staff in the health centres

    visited had for months, and in some cases, years not received salaries (Medicines and Health

    Service Delivery Monitoring Unit, 52).

    The distribution of health workers between urban and hard-to-reach areas is inequitable because

    incentives to encourage staff to work in the latter districts are few: opportunities for career

    advancement are limited, the availability of staff accommodation restricted, access to communal

    services and training are insufficient, working conditions are poor, and workloads are excessive. As

    a result, absenteeism is at a high rate (52 percent), turnover of health personnel is high,

    performance is poor, and productivity is low.22

                                                                                                                   22  A detailed description of the poor conditions faced by health workers to perform their duties in two district case studies can be found in (Kawooya Ssebunya 2009)

  •      

      26  

    Besides the undoubtedly harsh conditions described above, another necessary element that needs

    be added to understand incentives to potential illegal actions in handling public sector drugs is the

    profit motive. It is a widely acknowledged fact that medicine prices in the private sector are

    substantially inflated. . For example, it has been reported that a dose of treatment that costs

    Shs93,000/= at the government rate is at Shs450,000/= in the private sector” (Medicines and Health

    Service Delivery Monitoring Unit, 32). Uganda does not have a policy to regulate medicine prices,

    which may be part of the problem, (Medicines Transparency Alliance 2010) and there is no national

    medicine price monitoring system for retail/patient prices.

    Furthermore, there is a significant problem with unregistered pharmacies in the private sector. The

    OAG has estimated that up to 50% of all pharmacies have not been certified and registered by the

    NDA. This situation involving price distortions, lack of regulation and abundance of informal

    pharmaceutical retailers provides ample incentives to divert medicines from the public to the private

    sectors.

    Complementing the picture is the fact that monitoring of health workers is also deficient. While

    districts are responsible to conduct regular inspections at the facility level, these in fact rarely occur.

    Also reported was the fact that often, even when monitoring visits do occur, the inspector fails to

    give an accurate report in the state of affairs, in many cases reporting positive conditions when in

    fact the situation is quite dire. In other words, there is no coherent internal sanctioning or control

    mechanism to enforce disciplined administration of the human resources.

    Lack of monitoring and enforcement capacities are not exclusive flaws of districts as other

    professional bodies, such as the Pharmaceutical Society of Uganda (PSU), lack legally binding

    policies against which to enforce disciplinary action (Medicines and Health Service Delivery

    Monitoring Unit, 81). Enforcing accountability of service providers to the population or government

    also lags because of the lack of a clear management structure. Hospitals and health centres (HCs)

    do not have “real managers” with authority, and those in charge tend to be “on

    assignment”(Hoffman and Namakula 2009, 7).

    Finally, on the topic of monitoring, quite clearly the agency that is most active and which, as

    discussed before, has substantial political power is the MHSDMU. This organization prides itself on

    setting the standard for exemplary fight against corruption. The degree to which their approach is

  • [Type  text]          

      27  

    effective or even positive is however unclear. The stakeholders consulted for this study unanimously

    described the monitoring strategies of the Unit as “militaristic.” There were many reports and

    anecdotal references to health workers being taken under arrest by the Unit’s monitoring teams

    without adequate inculpating evidence. As a result, health facility staff are terrified of those visits.

    Stakeholder consultations shed some light into how this “militaristic” approach was actually

    generating precisely the wrong incentives among workers. It was mentioned that health workers,

    fearful of stocking out when the MHSDMU paid a visit, were actually withholding drugs from patients

    in order to have something to show should the Unit teams inspect their facilities.

    A substantial problem with monitoring as is currently applied along the distribution line and

    especially MHSDMU’s approach is that as soon as inspectors leave everything goes back to where it

    was because the incentives for the staff and other actors involved remain the same. In the end,

    communities do support the unregistered pharmacists and the illegal practices because these are

    the mechanisms they have at hand, through which, when they or their families become ill, they can

    access any measure of care.

    The result is that health staff are demoralized and, having no reassurances that their positions can

    lead to better remuneration or promotions, the actual incentives under which they are operating are

    negative. From an individual cost-benefit analysis it makes sense for health workers to incur in

    actions such as absenting themselves from work to seek other incomes, or to take advantage of any

    opportunities for material gain through misuse of resources accessible and available to them.

    Suggested anticorruption and governance enhancing strategies for the Ugandan public sector drug supply chain  

    This report has provided an assessment of governance risks in the Ugandan public drug supply

    chain based on a political power and influence assessment of institutions and actors. One of the

    implications of this assessment is that the policy change to pre-finance NMS entailed a redistribution

    of power among different stakeholders, which can be characterized as a zero sum game. To begin

    to search for politically feasible strategies to improve governance outcomes it is therefore helpful to

    question whether it is possible to generate proposals amounting to a positive sum game for the

    relevant stakeholders. It goes without saying that acknowledging the underlying political realities is a

    first step in this direction.

  •      

      28  

    The following suggested strategies for improving governance along the Ugandan public sector drug

    supply chain are centred around the two major systemic flaws identified (excessive centralization of

    informal power and excessive fragmentation of formal power) as well as the two institutional

    junctions identified for governance risks (NMS and human resources at the facility level).

    Excessive centralization of informal power: NMS  

    The Ugandan health sector currently suffers from a clear mismatch between formal attributions and

    actual political power and influence. One longer-term objective to improve system effectiveness

    should be to restore MoH’s role as steward of the health system with a leading voice and effective

    decision-making power. In the short term, the political power and influence analysis suggests that

    NMS should be targeted as the key agent capable of generating significant governance enhancing

    changes.

    While centralization of decision making power is not in and of itself a governance risk, it becomes

    one when that power is discretionary and lacks adequate accountability checks. This is the issue

    that needs to be addressed.

    To improve transparency and accountability at NMS, it will be necessary to break the current vicious

    circle that generates unwillingness to act transparently, on the one hand, and suspicions and

    criticism, on the other. This would involve trust-building measures at different levels and among

    different actors.

    Generating incentives for NMS to become more willing to share information involves sensitive

    political work, as there is no technical or regulatory formula to make a politically powerful agent

    more transparent and accountable. This is not to say, however, that it is impossible to achieve. With

    true coordinating efforts, development partners can take the opportunity to exercise the

    unquestionable leverage they possess to promote the effective dialogue that would be needed.23

    Given that major stakeholders openly recognize that centralizing the budget and decision making

                                                                                                                   23  A key strategic partner to bring on board this type of initiative would unquestionably be CDC, the only development partner providing budget support directly to NMS. A new agreement covering the next five years has been recently approved for an amount close to 50 million USD in direct budget support.

  • [Type  text]          

      29  

    power over procurement, storage and distribution of drugs was indeed reasonable, one initial

    political task would be to communicate in an effective manner to NMS management that the aim of

    key non-state players is not to revert that policy. This would include an open acknowledgement of

    the observed and accepted improvements in numbers of medicines accessible since the policy

    change and a clear statement of support to the current system.

    An orchestrated political statement in that direction could open the way to NMS beginning to

    acknowledge that it is in its interest to be more open and transparent. Furthermore, the actual

    political climate might even be conducive to a greater receptiveness to this type of approach. In

    times of political instability and growing opposition, as is the case now, even regimes that are

    typically closed and secretive can find benefit in the development of new or strengthened sources of

    support and legitimacy.24 With due political sensitivity this momentum can be effectively exploited.

    It would remain a political task for the agents taking on this initiative to identify within the NMS

    establishment those individuals that can be expected to be more receptive to moving towards

    modes of legitimation based on support and collaboration with other non-state stakeholders rather

    than relying exclusively on direct (and informal) access to the higher echelons of political power.

    The need to share information on processes, allocative decisions and outcomes would evidently

    need to constitute a central point in the agenda for a dialogue with NMS. However, it would be an

    extremely important exercise for the interested stakeholders, Including donors, to discuss and agree

    beforehand on what would be acceptable transparency and accountability indicators that they

    would like to see from NMS. Claims about lack of transparency and accountability should be

    complemented with operational definitions of what is exactly missing, especially given the

    generalized agreement by technical reviews and assessments that the regulatory framework

    governing NMS is adequate. This would provide for a concrete and constructive starting point that

    could eventually also lead to setting mutually agreed upon milestones and targets.

    The continued development of creative partnerships to develop and implement better technical

    procedures (such as accurate estimation of needs, development of grant proposals for funding

    opportunities, and mechanisms for monitoring and tracking drugs along the distribution line) could

                                                                                                                   24 For instance, and given the extensive negative coverage that stock-outs have received in the media and the political repercussions this presumably had, it would possibly be attractive from the regime’s perspective to receive favorable coverage of initiatives to improve NMS performance through collaboration with CSOs and DPs.

  •      

      30  

    potentially generate positive political synergies. Collaboration with credible, non-state partners can

    be seen as a politically inexpensive way to generate much needed legitimacy vis-à-vis the health and

    patient advocacy CSOs, and can also aid in the development of shared responsibility for obtained

    results instead of a one-sided finger pointing which generates high and adverse political stakes.

    The current political situation can be seen as an opportunity to generate greater openness within

    NMS. Improving governance as a way to regain political legitimacy can be of interest to political

    elites if the political costs of the status quo become too high. This therefore needs to be facilitated

    with careful consideration of the political purposes that weak governance has served the regime so

    far.

    Excessive fragmentation of formal power, human resources and preventing drug pilferage  

    Undoubtedly, serious accountability weaknesses exist when health workers succumb to incentives

    to abuse their positions in order to profit from the sale of life saving drugs at the expense of patients.

    As discussed above, in order to understand accountability weaknesses one has to look not only at

    monitoring and enforcement of sanctions but also at the underlying incentives to action that

    ultimately underpin the cost-benefit analysis that leads to the decision whether to steal medicines or

    not.

    As has been discussed before, a substantial part of the problem stems from the desperate

    conditions many health workers at the community and district levels face. They experience

    overwhelming workloads without being adequately remunerated and without having expectations of

    career advancement.

    Addressing corruption at this level requires a comprehensive approach that brings together

    attention to all different components of accountability and that makes a career in the health sector a

    viable, attractive avenue to personal advancement. This would involve not only better remuneration

    and promotion possibilities, but also adequate monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. The

    institution of a civil service-type scheme for health workers could address all such issues by

    generating the correct incentives for workers to actually seek to adequately store, manage, and

    dispense drugs.

  • [Type  text]          

      31  

    A clear path for advancement along the health sector hierarchy could be usefully tied to attainment

    of personal milestones by the health worker. Milestones could include, for example, a requirement

    to spend a period of time serving a remote rural area as a requisite to move to the next level.

    Attainment of a minimum performance record, based on patient or community scorecards, would

    be an effective route to generate positive incentives for the worker. Direct community monitoring

    mechanisms have the added value that evaluation and monitoring are tied to service provision at

    the workplace and not based on sporadic visits of inspectors, which leave things unchanged after

    they leave.25

    Engaging the MHSDMU in a dialogue, in which the drawbacks of a militaristic approach to monitoring

    could be laid out and alternatives discussed, would be an essential move towards putting in place

    positive incentives to accountability at the local level.

    However, it should be acknowledged that there are very serious challenges to developing a health

    sector civil service, including some having to do with the administrative decentralization of the

    Ugandan state. One obstacle to the creation of a merit-based system for human resources

    management and promotions is that, because formal responsibility for service delivery lies with the

    district and there has been such a proliferation of them, the prospective career path of the health

    worker is cut short at the district level under the current system. In fact, one of the stakeholders

    consulted suggested that recruitment should be recentralized, not to a central authority but rather

    to a district level recruiting agency to allow for movement of health workers across districts.

    Therefore, in order to address corruption risks along the drug distribution line a systemic approach is

    needed. This requires the involvement and coordination of the full range of government agencies

    with inputs and decision-making power over different aspects associated with both drug distribution

    responsibilities as well as human resources.26

                                                                                                                   25 In favour of this type of approach there is evidence of successful use of community level monitoring of drugs in Uganda. This work, reported by (Björkman and Svensson 2010) suggests that when local NGOs encouraged communities to engage with local health services, they were likely monitor providers very effectively, leading to more responsive delivery. 26 The list includes MoH, NMS, MoFPED, MHSDMU, NDA, DHOs, the Ministry of Local Government (MOLG), and the Ministry of Public Service (MOPS).

     

  •      

      32  

    However, perhaps the most problematic obstacle to developing a merit-based career path has to do

    with the politics of decentralization. As has been discussed above, at the district level the human

    resources decisions for health centres represent an integral part of the spoils available to feed local

    patronage systems.

    Again, the actual political juncture can probably be harnessed to begin to break detrimental

    methods of obtaining political support and legitimacy. DHOs, as was mentioned above, are among

    the political actors who lost as a result of the centralization of decision-making power in NMS. This

    state of affairs could potentially be harnessed to propose new modalities of political legitimation and

    empowerment of district level authorities through, for example, partnership with communities to

    monitor and reward the successful work of health facility staff. Moreover, increasing the support

    bases of DHOs through community participation could play to the strategic political advantage of

    district authorities vis-à-vis NMS in potentially renegotiating some of their lost clout.

    As said before, the fact that potential profits from drug sales through unlicensed pharmacies are

    high contributes to the mix of negative incentives. Therefore, an additional element that would need

    to be addressed to fully close the circle would be to improve on the monitoring and regulation of

    pharmacies. Already there is an initiative to verify whether a pharmacy is licensed or not through

    the use of an SMS system but this is not very well known. Also attention would need to be given to

    the constraints under which NDA operates, including the lack of an allocated budget (it relies on the

    fees it charges for its regulatory and licencing activities, which is not in adherence to best practice

    for regulatory bodies) and serious human resources shortcomings.

    Finally, in order to optimize the effectiveness of initiatives to attack corruption and governance risks,

    a concerted effort to coordinate actions and programs and to present a unified front would be

    required, not only among development partners, but between development partners and CSOs in

    the health and patient advocacy fields. Making use of and combining on going programmes and

    initiatives to promote the ends described above through a unified front would be an enormously

    important first step to really make the most of the potential political leverage of the donor

    community and civil society combined.

     

     

  • [Type  text]          

      33  

    References  Björkman, Martina, and Jakob Svensson. 2010. WHEN IS COMMUNITY‐BASED MONITORING

    EFFECTIVE? EVIDENCE FROM A RANDOMIZED EXPERIMENT IN PRIMARY HEALTH IN UGANDA. Journal of the European Economic Association 8, no. 2‐3 (April 5): 571-581. doi:10.1111/j.1542-4774.2010.tb00527.x.

    Dicklitch, Susan, and Doreen Lwanga. 2003. The Politics of Being Non-Political: Human Rights Organizations and the Creation of a Positive Human Rights Culture in Uganda. Human Rights Quarterly 25, no. 2 (May): 482-509.

    Economic Policy Research Centre. 2009. Governing Health Service Delivery in Uganda: a Tracking Study of Drug Delivery Mechanisms. Research Report no.1. August.

    Freedom House. Country Report Uganda 2010. Freedom in the World. http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&year=2010&country=7940.

    Hoffman, Jariya, and Valentine Namakula. 2009. Uganda Health System Support Project Governance and Accountability Action Plan Final Report. World Bank, December.

    Hussman, Karen. 2011. Addressing corruption in the health sector. Securing equitable access to healthcare for everyone. U4 Issue. U4 Anticorruption Resource Centre/ CHR. Michelsen Institute, January.

    Kawooya Ssebunya, Andrew. 2009. Public goods delivery in Uganda: Exploring local governance forms & leadership that work for the poor. Africa Power and Politics Programme, December.

    Manyak, Terrell G., and Isaac Wasswa Katono. 2011. Impact of Multiparty Politics on Local Government in Uganda. African Conflict and Peacebuidling Review 1, no. 1: 3-38.

    Mattes, Robert, Francis Kibirige, and Robert Sentamu. 2010. Understanding Citizen’s Attitudes to Democracy in Uganda. AfroBarometer Working Paper 124, October.

    Medicines and Health Service Delivery Monitoring Unit. Annual Report 2010. Medicines Transparency Alliance. 2010. Report on the Uganda Phramaceutical Sector Scan. Part of

    Component 1 of MeTA Baseline Assessments. June. Mwenda, Andrew M. 2007. Personalizing Power in Uganda. Journal of Democracy 18, no. 3: 23-37. Nakayi, Florence. 2010. Uganda’s districts since independence. New Vision, August 27.

    http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/12/730140. New Vision. 2010. Quick Shake-Up Needed at NMS. New Vision, August 20, sec. Editorial.

    http://allafrica.com/stories/201008230715.html. Njoroge, John, and Molly Lister. 2009. Hand-on minister gets shock in clinic. The Independent, July

    21. http://www.independent.co.ug/News/news-analysis/1292-hands-on-minister-gets-shock-in-clinic.

    Office of the Auditor General. 2010. Value for Money Audit Report on Procurement and Storage of Drugs by National Medical Stores (NMS). March. http://www.oag.go.ug/annual_reports.php?dId=7.

    Ssebuyira, Martin. 2011. NMS Takes Drugs to Villages. Daily Monitor, April 2. http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/-/688334/1137048/-/c3apbfz/-/index.html.

    Tripp, Aili Mari. 2004. The Changing Face of Authoritarianism in Africa: The Case of Uganda. Africa Today 50, no. 3: 3-26.

    Uganda Country Working Group. 2010. Medicine Price Monitor. December. World Bank Institute. 2010. Imrpoving Governance in Pharmaceutical Procurement. Desk Review and

    Stakeholders Consultations Report Uganda. December.

  •      

      34  

    Appendix 1

    List of Institutional Affiliations of Stakeholders Interviewed

    -‐ CDC – Centers for Disease control and Prevention

    -‐ Clinton Health Access Initiative

    -‐ Danida- Danish International Development Agency

    -‐ DFID- UK Department for International Development

    -‐ HEPS-Uganda Coalition for Health Promotion and Social Development

    -‐ MeTA-Medicines Transparency Alliance

    -‐ Office of the Auditor General

    -‐ SURE Programme. Securing Ugandans Right to Essential Medicines

    -‐ UNHCO Uganda National Health Users’/ Consumers’ Organisation

    -‐ UNICEF

    -‐ WHO-World Health Organization

    -‐ World Bank