Suchergebnisse

In this paper we use the cross-cultural record to identify the behavioral rules of conduct, and the system supporting those rules, that are found in traditional societies, such as tribal societies. We then draw on the historical record to identify the behavioral rules of conduct, and the system supporting those rules that were found in the early state. The proposal tested here is that in traditional societies the behavioral rules of conduct and the systems that support them (e.g., processes for identifying guilt, punishing offenders, enacting legislation, preventing conflict) are aimed at promoting enduring, cooperative relationships among individuals who are identified as kin through common ancestry. The assumption underlying this proposal is that once human females increased their investment in offspring, cultural strategies to protect those offspring became more important. A moral system, which is the term we use to refer to the early system of behavioral codes, protected offspring by turning conspecific threats into the protectors, providers, and educators of children. It did this by creating a strong kinship system, the members of which were bound by common ancestry (actual or metaphorical), thus tying individuals into enduring, cooperative relationships by using culture to encourage them to honor ongoing duties to one another. This kinship-based moral system is significantly different from that found in societies in which the majority of interactions are with non-kin, interactions often center on the exchange of good and services, and traditions have largely been broken down. We refer to this second system as a system of law and argue that this distinction between moral and legal systems has implications for attempts to explain the evolutionary basis of human cooperation.

BACKGROUND: In 2002 Afghanistan's Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) and its development partners initiated a new paradigm for the health sector by electing to Contract-Out (CO) the Basic Package of Health Services (BPHS) to non-state providers (NSPs). This model is generally regarded as successful, but literature is scarce that examines the motivations underlying implementation and factors influencing program success. This paper uses relevant theories and qualitative data to describe how and why contracting out delivery of primary health care services to NSPs has been effective. The main aim of this study was to assess the contextual, institutional, and contractual factors that influenced the performance of NSPs delivering the BPHS in Afghanistan. METHODS: The qualitative study design involved individual in-depth interviews and focus group discussions conducted in six provinces of Afghanistan, as well as a desk review. The framework for assessing key factors of the contracting mechanism proposed by Liu et al. was utilized in the design, data collection and data analysis. RESULTS: While some contextual factors facilitated the CO (e.g. MoPH leadership, NSP innovation and community participation), harsh geography, political interference and insecurity in some provinces had negative effects. Contractual factors, such as effective input and output management, guided health service delivery. Institutional factors were important; management capacity of contracted NSPs affects their ability to deliver outcomes. Effective human resources and pharmaceutical management were notable elements that contributed to the successful delivery of the BPHS. The contextual, contractual and institutional factors interacted with each other. CONCLUSION: Three sets of factors influenced the implementation of the BPHS: contextual, contractual and institutional. The MoPH should consider all of these factors when contracting out the BPHS and other functions to NSPs. Other fragile states and countries emerging from a period of conflict could learn from Afghanistan's example in contracting out primary health care services, keeping in mind that generic or universal contracting policies might not work in all geographical areas within a country or between countries.

BACKGROUND: In 2002 Afghanistan's Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) and its development partners initiated a new paradigm for the health sector by electing to Contract-Out (CO) the Basic Package of Health Services (BPHS) to non-state providers (NSPs). This model is generally regarded as successful, but literature is scarce that examines the motivations underlying implementation and factors influencing program success. This paper uses relevant theories and qualitative data to describe how and why contracting out delivery of primary health care services to NSPs has been effective. The main aim of this study was to assess the contextual, institutional, and contractual factors that influenced the performance of NSPs delivering the BPHS in Afghanistan. METHODS: The qualitative study design involved individual in-depth interviews and focus group discussions conducted in six provinces of Afghanistan, as well as a desk review. The framework for assessing key factors of the contracting mechanism proposed by Liu et al. was utilized in the design, data collection and data analysis. RESULTS: While some contextual factors facilitated the CO (e.g. MoPH leadership, NSP innovation and community participation), harsh geography, political interference and insecurity in some provinces had negative effects. Contractual factors, such as effective input and output management, guided health service delivery. Institutional factors were important; management capacity of contracted NSPs affects their ability to deliver outcomes. Effective human resources and pharmaceutical management were notable elements that contributed to the successful delivery of the BPHS. The contextual, contractual and institutional factors interacted with each other. CONCLUSION: Three sets of factors influenced the implementation of the BPHS: contextual, contractual and institutional. The MoPH should consider all of these factors when contracting out the BPHS and other functions to NSPs. Other fragile states and countries emerging from a period of conflict could learn from Afghanistan's example in contracting out primary health care services, keeping in mind that generic or universal contracting policies might not work in all geographical areas within a country or between countries.

BACKGROUND:We describe reach, partnerships, products, benefits, and lessons learned of the 25 Community Network Programs (CNPs) that applied community-based participatory research (CBPR) to reduce cancer health disparities. METHODS:Quantitative and qualitative data were abstracted from CNP final reports. Qualitative data were grouped by theme. RESULTS:Together, the 25 CNPs worked with more than 2,000 academic, clinical, community, government, faith-based, and other partners. They completed 211 needs assessments, leveraged funds for 328 research and service projects, trained 719 new investigators, educated almost 55,000 community members, and published 991 articles. Qualitative data illustrated how use of CBPR improved research methods and participation; improved knowledge, interventions, and outcomes; and built community capacity. Lessons learned related to the need for time to nurture partnerships and the need to attend to community demand for sustained improvements in cancer services. IMPLICATIONS:Findings demonstrate the value of government-supported, community-academic, CBPR partnerships in cancer prevention and control research.

BackgroundWe describe reach, partnerships, products, benefits, and lessons learned of the 25 Community Network Programs (CNPs) that applied community-based participatory research (CBPR) to reduce cancer health disparities.MethodsQuantitative and qualitative data were abstracted from CNP final reports. Qualitative data were grouped by theme.ResultsTogether, the 25 CNPs worked with more than 2,000 academic, clinical, community, government, faith-based, and other partners. They completed 211 needs assessments, leveraged funds for 328 research and service projects, trained 719 new investigators, educated almost 55,000 community members, and published 991 articles. Qualitative data illustrated how use of CBPR improved research methods and participation; improved knowledge, interventions, and outcomes; and built community capacity. Lessons learned related to the need for time to nurture partnerships and the need to attend to community demand for sustained improvements in cancer services.ImplicationsFindings demonstrate the value of government-supported, community-academic, CBPR partnerships in cancer prevention and control research.