Policy Points Earmarked tax policies for behavioral health are perceived as having positive impacts related to increasing flexible funding, suggesting benefits to expand this financing approach. Implementation challenges related to these earmarked taxes included tax base volatility that impedes long-term service delivery planning and inequities in the distribution of tax revenue. Recommendations for designing or revising earmarked tax policies include developing clear guidelines and support systems to manage the administrative aspects of earmarked tax programs, cocreating reporting and oversight structures with system and service delivery agents, and selecting revenue streams that are relatively stable across years.
BACKGROUND: Over 200 cities and counties in the United States have implemented policies earmarking tax revenue for behavioral health services. This mixed-methods study was conducted with the aim of characterizing perceptions of the impacts of these earmarked tax policies, strengths and weaknesses of tax policy designs, and factors that influence decision making about how tax revenue is allocated for services.
METHODS: Study data came from surveys completed by 274 officials involved in behavioral health earmarked tax policy implementation and 37 interviews with officials in a sample of jurisdictions with these taxes-California (n = 16), Washington (n = 12), Colorado (n = 6), and Iowa (n = 3). Interviews primarily explored perceptions of the advantages and drawbacks of the earmarked tax, perceptions of tax policy design, and factors influencing decisions about revenue allocation.
RESULTS: A total of 83% of respondents strongly agreed that it was better to have the tax than not, 73.2% strongly agreed that the tax increased flexibility to address complex behavioral health needs, and 65.1% strongly agreed that the tax increased the number of people served by evidence-based practices. Only 43.3%, however, strongly agreed that it was easy to satisfy tax-reporting requirements. Interviews revealed that the taxes enabled funding for services and implementation supports, such as training in the delivery of evidence-based practices, and supplemented mainstream funding sources (e.g., Medicaid). However, some interviewees also reported challenges related to volatility of funding, inequities in the distribution of tax revenue, and, in some cases, administratively burdensome tax reporting. Decisions about tax revenue allocation were influenced by goals such as reducing behavioral health care inequities, being responsive to community needs, addressing constraints of mainstream funding sources, and, to a lesser degree, supporting services considered to be evidence based.
CONCLUSIONS: Earmarked taxes are a promising financing strategy to improve access to, and quality of, behavioral health services by supplementing mainstream state and federal financing.

BACKGROUND: Governance, health financing, and service delivery are critical elements of health systems for provision of robust and sustainable chronic disease care. We leveraged the third iteration of the International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas (ISN-GKHA) to evaluate oversight and financing for kidney care worldwide.
METHODS: A survey was administered to stakeholders from countries affiliated with the ISN from July to September 2022. We evaluated funding models utilized for reimbursement of medications, services for the management of chronic kidney disease, and provision of kidney replacement therapy (KRT). We also assessed oversight structures for the delivery of kidney care.
RESULTS: Overall, 167 of the 192 countries and territories contacted responded to the survey, representing 97.4% of the global population. High-income countries tended to use public funding to reimburse all categories of kidney care in comparison with low-income countries (LICs) and lower-middle income countries (LMICs). In countries where public funding for KRT was available, 78% provided universal health coverage. The proportion of countries that used public funding to fully reimburse care varied for non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (27%), dialysis for acute kidney injury (either hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis) (44%), chronic hemodialysis (45%), chronic peritoneal dialysis (42%), and kidney transplant medications (36%). Oversight for kidney care was provided at a national level in 63% of countries, and at a state/provincial level in 28% of countries.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated significant gaps in universal care coverage, and in oversight and financing structures for kidney care, particularly in in LICs and LMICs.

BACKGROUND: The attainment of global health security goals and universal health coverage will remain a mirage unless African health systems are adequately funded to improve resilience to public health emergencies. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the global inequity in accessing medical countermeasures, leaving African countries far behind. As we anticipate the next pandemic, improving investments in health systems to adequately finance pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response (PPPR) promptly, ensuring equity and access to medical countermeasures, is crucial. In this article, we analyze the African and global pandemic financing initiatives and put ways forward for policymakers and the global health community to consider.
METHODS: This article is based on a rapid literature review and desk review of various PPPR financing mechanisms in Africa and globally. Consultation of leaders and experts in the area and scrutinization of various related meeting reports and decisions have been carried out.
METHODS: The African Union (AU) has demonstrated various innovative financing mechanisms to mitigate the impacts of public health emergencies in the continent. To improve equal access to the COVID-19 medical countermeasures, the AU launched Africa Medical Supplies Platform (AMSP) and Africa Vaccine Acquisition Trust (AVAT). These financing initiatives were instrumental in mitigating the impacts of COVID-19 and their lessons can be capitalized as we make efforts for PPPR. The COVID-19 Response Fund, subsequently converted into the African Epidemics Fund (AEF), is another innovative financing mechanism to ensure sustainable and self-reliant PPPR efforts. The global initiatives for financing PPPR include the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF) and the Pandemic Fund. The PEF was criticized for its inadequacy in building resilient health systems, primarily because the fund ignored the prevention and preparedness items. The Pandemic Fund is also being criticized for its suboptimal emphasis on the response aspect of the pandemic and non-inclusive governance structure.
CONCLUSIONS: To ensure optimal financing for PPPR, we call upon the global health community and decision-makers to focus on the harmonization of financing efforts for PPPR, make regional financing mechanisms central to global PPPR financing efforts, and ensure the inclusivity of international finance governance systems.

The Supreme Court decision on the Mandanas-Garcia petition regarding the internal revenue allotment given to local government units is a significant ruling in strengthening the concept of decentralized governance and in the delivery of services. While the ruling grants local government greater resources and financial support, the immediate implication is the full devolution of services defined in the Local Government Code, including health services. The urgent concern is how much the Mandanas-Garcia Ruling will affect local health systems. Through a review of related documents and publications, this paper presents some existing and foreseeable issues surrounding the implementation of the Mandanas-Garcia Ruling in relation to the current devolved healthcare system. In particular, challenges in implementing the ruling in relation to health devolution, the local health system process, and the Universal Health Care Act are discussed. Some concrete action points for addressing these issues are also posited for policy-makers and implementors to consider in order to ensure not just the smooth and efficient implementation of the ruling but also the continuity of care for Filipinos.

At present, the world is off-track to meet the World Health Assembly global nutrition targets for 2025. Reducing the prevalence of stunting and low birthweight (LBW) in children, and anaemia in women, and increasing breastfeeding rates are among the prioritized global nutrition targets for all countries. Governments and development partners need evidence-based data to understand the true costs and consequences of policy decisions and investments. Yet there is an evidence gap on the health, human capital, and economic costs of inaction on preventing undernutrition for most countries. The Cost of Inaction tool and expanded Cost of Not Breastfeeding tool provide country-specific data to help address the gaps. Every year undernutrition leads to 1.3 million cases of preventable child and maternal deaths globally. In children, stunting results in the largest economic burden yearly at US$548 billion (0.7% of global gross national income [GNI]), followed by US$507 billion for suboptimal breastfeeding (0.6% of GNI), US$344 billion (0.3% of GNI) for LBW and US$161 billion (0.2% of GNI) for anaemia in children. Anaemia in women of reproductive age (WRA) costs US$113 billion (0.1% of GNI) globally in current income losses. Accounting for overlap in stunting, suboptimal breastfeeding and LBW, the analysis estimates that preventable undernutrition cumulatively costs the world at least US$761 billion per year, or US$2.1 billion per day. The variation in the regional and country-level estimates reflects the contextual drivers of undernutrition. In the lead-up to the renewed World Health Assembly targets and Sustainable Development Goals for 2030, the data generated from these tools are powerful information for advocates, governments and development partners to inform policy decisions and investments into high-impact low-cost nutrition interventions. The costs of inaction on undernutrition continue to be substantial, and serious coordinated action on the global nutrition targets is needed to yield the significant positive human capital and economic benefits from investing in nutrition.

The 1978 Alma Ata Declaration established recommendations for health systems, which significantly impacted low-income countries. These guidelines marked improvements in access to health, coverage and financial equity, especially in Latin American countries.
UNASSIGNED: This paper focuses on the role of the private sector (including for-profit and non-profit organizations) in achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC). It examines their involvement in the management, service delivery, resource investment and financing of primary health care (PHC) within the sustainable development goals (SDGs).
UNASSIGNED: The study covers a review of health systems, emphasizing the influence of private institutions on public health, and evaluates how private sector experiences contribute to system functions and progress towards UHC.
UNASSIGNED: The findings indicate the crucial role of the private sector in global health systems, notably expanded in several countries. Private actors are essential to improve access and coverage, particularly in countries with low health indicators. The article highlights the importance of primary care physicians understanding these dynamics since their management is vital in implementing public policies for UHC.

The German healthcare system is outdated, no longer reflects reality and needs to be reformed. In addition to a lack of ideas, there is a lack of courage and will to implement necessary reforms. Where will current developments lead us? When it comes to financing the healthcare system, immense challenges await political decision-makers. Demographic change is already posing major problems for healthcare today. Parallel to the increase in the number of patients, the time that physicians have available for their patients has been decreasing for years. Ultimately, social change and the increase in part-time employment mean that there is significantly less money available. Patient dissatisfaction is increasing as expectations are not being met. While hospitals receive financial support, the outpatient sector has been left empty-handed for years. As financial investors are forcing their way into outpatient care, the focus must be prevented from being purely on maximizing profits. Thus, a reorganization of the healthcare system is necessary.
UNASSIGNED: Das deutsche Gesundheitssystem ist überholt, nicht mehr der Realität entsprechend und reformbedürftig. Man ist ideenlos und der Mut und Wille zu notwendigen Reformen fehlt. Wohin soll uns die aktuelle Entwicklung führen? Bei der Finanzierung des Gesundheitssystems warten immense Herausforderungen auf die politischen Entscheidungsträger. Der demografische Wandel stellt die Gesundheitsversorgung schon heute vor große Probleme. Parallel zum Anstieg der Patientinnen und Patienten sinkt seit Jahren die Zeit, die Ärztinnen und Ärzte für ihre Patienten zur Verfügung steht. Letztlich steht durch den gesellschaftlichen Wandel und dem Anstieg der Teilzeitbeschäftigung deutlich weniger Geld zur Verfügung. Die Unzufriedenheit der Patientinnen und Patienten nimmt zu, da Erwartungen nicht erfüllt werden. Während Krankenhäuser finanzielle Unterstützung erhalten, geht der ambulante Sektor gefühlt seit Jahren leer aus. Da Finanzinvestoren in die ambulante Versorgung drängen, muss verhindert werden, dass eine reine Gewinnmaximierung im Vordergrund steht. Eine Neuausrichtung des Gesundheitssystems ist notwendig.

The study assesses the impact of eight sources of financing (internal funds, bank loans, credit lines, trade credit, equity, grants, leasing and factoring) on innovation and firm growth. It provides evidence that not all external financing sources have the same impact on innovation and growth. Output additionality on turnover growth seems higher for equity financing. In contrast, employment growth appears to be more associated with financing sources linked to increased fixed assets or the solving of liquidity problems. The number of financing instruments used together also seems to matter, revealing the existence of complementarities.

BACKGROUND: Health services utilization related to hip osteoarthritis imposes a significant burden on society and health care systems. Our aim was to analyse the epidemiological and health insurance disease burden of hip osteoarthritis in Hungary based on nationwide data.
METHODS: Data were extracted from the nationwide financial database of the National Health Insurance Fund Administration (NHIFA) of Hungary for the year 2018. The analysed data included annual patient numbers, prevalence, and age-standardized prevalence per 100,000 population in outpatient care, health insurance costs calculated for age groups and sexes for all types of care. Patients with hip osteoarthritis were identified using code M16 of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), 10th revision. Age-standardised prevalence rates were calculated using the European Standard Population 2013 (ESP2013).
RESULTS: Based on patient numbers of outpatient care, the prevalence per 100,000 among males was 1,483.7 patients (1.5%), among females 2,905.5 (2.9%), in total 2,226.2 patients (2.2%). The age-standardised prevalence was 1,734.8 (1.7%) for males and 2,594.8 (2.6%) for females per 100,000 population, for a total of 2,237.6 (2.2%). The prevalence per 100,000 population was higher for women in all age groups. In age group 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and 70 + the overall prevalence was 0.2%, 0.8%, 2.7%, 5.0% and 7.7%, respectively, describing a continuously increasing trend. In 2018, the NHIFA spent 42.31 million EUR on the treatment of hip osteoarthritis. Hip osteoarthritis accounts for 1% of total nationwide health insurance expenditures. 36.8% of costs were attributed to the treatment of male patients, and 63.2% to female patients. Acute inpatient care, outpatient care and chronic and rehabilitation inpatient care were the main cost drivers, accounting for 62.7%, 14.6% and 8.2% of the total health care expenditure for men, and 51.0%, 20.0% and 11.2% for women, respectively. The average annual treatment cost per patient was 3,627 EUR for men and 4,194 EUR for women.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of hip osteoarthritis was 1.96 times higher (the age-standardised prevalence was 1.5 times higher) in women compared to men. Acute inpatient care was the major cost driver in the treatment of hip osteoarthritis. The average annual treatment cost per patient was 15.6% higher for women compared to men.

Despite the potential of gene therapy to transform the lives of patients with rare genetic diseases, serious concern has been raised about the financing of the high up-front costs for such treatments and about the ability of the employer-sponsored insurance system in the United States, particularly in small firms, to pay for discoveries of this type. In this paper, we provide a conceptual framework and empirical evidence to support the proposition that, at present, private group insurance financing of cost-effective gene therapies is not only feasible and competitively necessary in the labor market for employers, regardless of group size, but also that, currently, the number of US workers in small firms who might be stressed by very high-priced claims is a tiny fraction of the group market for genetic treatments. The current system of employer-paid self-insurance supplemented by stop-loss coverage should be able to facilitate the use of new cost-effective gene therapies. Other alternative methods of financing that have been proposed may not be urgently needed. There are, however, some concerns about the long-term resilience of this system if stop-loss premiums continue to have high growth.