Development and use of a master health facility list: Haiti's experience during the 2010 earthquake response

Rose-Wood, Alyson; Heard, Nathan; Thermidor, Roody; Chan, Jessica; Joseph, Fanor; Lerebours, Gérald; Zugaldía, Antonio; Konkel, Kimberly; Edwards, Michael; Lang, Bill; Torres, Carmen-Rosa

doi:10.9745/ghsp-d-14-00029

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Distance influences access and use of health services. In case of disease outbreaks or unexpected health outcomes identified in NHMIS or DHIS2, authorities will be able to better plan and intervene with the necessary control measures knowing the geographical distribution of facilities [13,14]. It will be beneficial to establish Ward level unique identification number for facilities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of health service delivery parameters in Kano and Zamfara States, Nigeria

Bala

Ajumobi

Umar

et al. 2020

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In 2013, the Nigeria Federal Ministry of Health established a Master Health Facility List (MHFL) as recommended by WHO. Since then, some health facilities (HFs) have ceased functioning and new facilities were established. We updated the MHFL and assessed service delivery parameters in the Malaria Frontline Project implementing areas in Kano and Zamfara States. Methods We assessed all HFs in each of the 34 project local government areas (LGAs) between July and September 2017. Project staff administered a semi-structured questionnaire developed for this assessment to heads of HFs about the type of facility, category and number of staff working at the facility and to record geo-coordinates of facility. Results In the Kano State project area, 726 HFs were identified and geo-located: 31 were new facilities, 608 (84%), 116 (16%) and two (0.3%) were Primary Health Care (PHC), secondary and tertiary facilities respectively. Using the national definition, there were 710 (98%) functional facilities and 644 (91%) of these reported to the national health information platform, District Health Information System, version 2 (DHIS2). The Zamfara project area had 739 HFs: eight were new, 715 (97%), 22 (3.0%) and two (0.2%) PHCs, secondary and tertiary facilities respectively. There were 695 (94%) functional facilities with 656 (94%) of these reporting to DHIS2. Using national criteria for primary health care designation, only 95 (9%) of all PHCs in the two States met the minimum human resource requirements. Conclusion Most HFs were functional and reported to DHIS2. A comprehensive MHFL having all the important parameters that should be established and updated regularly by authorities to make it more useful for health services administration and management. Most functional facilities are understaffed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This assessment was conducted in the 20 MFPimplementing LGAs in Kano State (Kano State has a total of 44 LGAs) and in all 14 LGAs in Zamfara State. Kano State has a population of 13,076,892 and Zamfara State has a population of 4,515,427 [11].…”

Section: Assessment Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of health service delivery parameters in Kano and Zamfara States, Nigeria

Bala

Ajumobi

Umar

et al. 2020

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This paper investigates the persistence of duplication on development projects in Nigeria through a case study focusing on the creation of health facility lists. Health facility lists are important planning tools for determining the capacity of services available in a country and the equity in distribution of the services among the population [ 15 , 16 ]. According to the World Health organization, a Master Health Facility List (MFL) “is a complete listing of health facilities in a country (both public and private) and is comprised of a set of identification items for each facility (signature domain) and basic information on the service capacity of each facility (service domain)” [ 17 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Duplication of effort across Development Projects in Nigeria: An example using the Master Health Facility List

Makinde

Meribole

Oyediran³

et al. 2018

OJPHI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveDuplication of effort across development projects is often the resultant effect of poor donor coordination in low- and middle- income countries which receive development assistance. This paper examines the persistence of duplication through a case study of health facility listing exercises in Nigeria.MethodsDocument reviews, key informant interviews, and a stakeholder’s meeting were undertaken to identify similar health facility listing exercises between 2010 and 2016.ResultsAs an outcome of this process, ten different health facility listing efforts were identified.DiscussionsProper coordination and collaboration could have resulted in a single list grown over time, ensuring return on investments. This study provides evidence of the persistence of duplication, years after global commitment to harmonization, better coordination and efficient use of development assistance were agreed to.ConclusionsThe paper concludes by making a proposal for strategic leadership in the health sector and the need to leverage information and communications technology through the development of an electronic Health Facility Registry that can archive the data on health facilities, create opportunity for continuous updates of the list, and provide for easy sharing of the data across different country stakeholders thereby eliminating duplication.KeywordsAid Effectiveness, Donor coordination; Health Facilities; Health Information System; Health Systems; International Cooperation; Master Facility List

show abstract

“…These difficulties were exacerbated by poor information and intelligence management 35,51,103 . As the initial response developed, co-ordination improved 99,111 with the development of single healthcare response arrangements 35,51,64 with master health facilities lists 111 being identified as useful co-ordination tools. Logistical difficulties due to travel disruption hindered the ability to deliver care 25,46,108,112 and transport patients 29,47 .…”

Section: Coordination Response and Logisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The changing health priorities of earthquake response and implications for preparedness: a scoping review

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development and use of a master health facility list: Haiti's experience during the 2010 earthquake response

Cited by 16 publications

References 9 publications

Assessment of health service delivery parameters in Kano and Zamfara States, Nigeria

Assessment of health service delivery parameters in Kano and Zamfara States, Nigeria

Duplication of effort across Development Projects in Nigeria: An example using the Master Health Facility List

The changing health priorities of earthquake response and implications for preparedness: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About