| Summary, etc. |
The Philippine National Health Accounts (PNHA) has been produced since the 1990s, providing relevant data needed by health policy makers. The structire of the 1991 to 2012 PNHA, as reported by the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) (now part of the new philippine Statitstics Atuthority (PSA), is a two dimentional framework that comprises the SOURCES OF FUNDS for health expenditures and the USES OF FUNDS for health expenditures. The health care system and health financing in the Philippines continue to evolve, cognizant that Juan and Juana are the focus and main recipients of health services in the country. But their health profriles and demographic needs have also changed, different from their profiles and needs two decades ago. Thus, it is imperative that health policy makers, administrators, and implementers are equiped by a good basis to make health care universal, better and available for Juan and Jauna. More information is now needed from the PNHA that includes how health care and health expenditures are allocated to the members of the population; how health care for the poor,in particular, is financed; and how health financing schemes are funded. But the current PNHA methodology is unable to meet these information requirements. To improve the usefulness of the PNHA to many users, a shift in the PNHA framework has long been recognized because it has become essential. The shift specifically involves the adoption of the System of the Health Accounts (SHA) 2011 in the country's health accounts compilation. Compared to the PNHA,SHA 2011 is three-dimensional, consisting of Consumption, provision, and financing. Another advantage of SHA 2011 is an accompanying software or computational tool, called the HEalth Accounts Production Tool (HAPT), which facilitates the process of estimating health accounts and ensures its consitency across countries. Thus, the adoption of SHA 2011 in the PNHA responds to demands for additional information, for more classifications, More information is deemed essential in making policies that are attuned to needs in the health sector, as well as in their planning, monitoring, and evaluation. Not to mention is the significance of having PNHA that is comparable internationally. The topic of the re-entry project (ReP) considered the adoption of SHA 2011 in the current PNHA system, in particular. Improvement if the PNHA, or expanding it, is also a priority in the Philippine Statistical Development Program 2011-20017. Meanwhile, the Scholar was fully aware of two development at that time: First, the NSCB was transitioning to the PSA, whcih will continue to compile the PNHA as its product and service. Second, SHA 2011 updates SHA version 1.0, and continues as the international framework fr, and promotes best practice in, the compilation of health accounts. Hence, it was timely to consider pursuing SHA 2011 in the PNHA compilation. In the light, the objective of the ReP was to determine the operational implications to the PSA of SHA 2011 as the framework for the PNHA. To have well-informed basis for knowing the implications of SHA 2011 in the operation of the PSA, the ReP performed an estimation of the national government health expenditures for 2012. To do this, this ReP used two approaches,i.e., one using the current PNHA methodoloty or the "business as useal" approach (referred to a PNHA-SHA). The processes, methodologies, and results derived from PNHA only and PNHA-SHA estimations were then compared to analyze the uses and implications of the adoption to SHA 2011. The ReP outputs constituted two parts: separate sets of estimates done on the PNHA only and PNHAS applied in the national government for 2012; and the documentation of the processes and implications involved in, and the instutional linkages required by, the propsed PNHA-SHA. A comparison of the two methodologies shows that PNHA only has one table that presents the sources and uses of fundso funds for health expenditures of the national government in 2012. On the other hand, PNHA-SHA has 11 tables that provide more classifications or disaggregation of data for 2012(e.g., by financing sources,financing schemes, instituinal units, health care providers, factor of provision, types of disease, sex and age group, income quintile, and region). It is noted that these details are the same levels required by key stakeholders,such as the Department of Health. PNHA only and PNHASHA differed in terms of the scope and aggregates, classifications used, and tables generated. To undertake PNHA-SHA, the incremental requirements included data, computation, compilation,technical support, and manpower and time rsources. Looking forwrad, these incremental requirements will also be needed in pursuing PNHA-SHA to other components of the PNHA. Collection of supplemental data for PNHA-SHA is needed; training of, and technical support to, the staff om MS Excel, Stata, SHA 2011 framework, and HAPT are essential; actual computattion and estimation entail additional working days; and bardware used for the estimation has to be upgraded. On the basis of the comparison on PNHA only and PNHA-SHA and given the implications of pursuing SHA 2011, this ReP finds that the PNHA -SHA can be done by the PSA even with its present level of manpower assigned to health accounts work. But to facilitate the work of the staff, they have to acquire good knowledge of SHA 2011 framework, and undergo training on the use of the various software's needed for the compilation. Last but not least, the support of the PSA, and its key partners, on health accounting is crucial. |