Dear Keti

 

Would you do the analysis with Mamuka again? If yes, we can offer you a fee of USD 500 each to prepare the numbers for 2018 and add them to the existing appendix tables. How soon can you do the analysis?

 

If you let me know, I will prepare the terms of reference.

 

Once we have the numbers, Erica will add them to the draft report.

 

I hope all is well at your end!

 

Thanks and best wishes

 

Sarah

 

 

Dear Keti

 

I discussed this briefly with Silviu and we think it would be useful to have the 2018 data, so it would be good to proceed so long as it can be done relatively quickly.

 

I will write to you separately about a contract.

 

Thanks and best wishes

 

Sarah

 

 

Dear Sarah,

 

Thank you for support and possibility to evaluate of country’s financial protection. As you are informed in May 2017, new criteria for differentiation of beneficiaries (according to beneficiaries' revenue) has been implemented (also 500 and 1000GEL deductible). Geostat already has Household budget survey data for 2018. It will be very interesting to see how influence this changes on financial protection of population. If you are interested and if is possibility to support us conduct financial protection evaluation for 2018.  New minister is sinking new wave of reforms and review of the current situation will be important.

 

Thank you again,

With best regards, Keti

 

 

Dear Keti

 

Thank you for this. I am pleased to let you know that Erica (copied) is now editing the Georgia report. We expect to finalise the report in the next few weeks. We will then share it with Triin and Silviu for their feedback, before we share it with the Minister.

 

We will of course send it to you first, with any outstanding queries.

 

I hope that sounds OK to you and Mamuka.

 

Best wishes

 

Sarah

 

 

Dear Sarah,

 

In September I sent draft report and excel files.

 

Please, if you have time see it and send us comments.

 

With best regards,

 

Keti

 

 

 

Dear Sarah,

 

I hope you are doing well. Thank you for your comments and I am sorry for late reply.

 

·         Catastrophic incidence really increases a lot by 2017. Is there any obvious reason for this? – Changes in May, 2017 – stratification services by income groups is influenced oop and catastrophic incidence.

·         There is a weird shift in catastrophic OOPs by structure in 2016 where inpatient falls and outpatient increases... but then in 2017 the inpatient share returns to something close to what it was in 2015 and before. We should ask them to double check that the categories have been defined correctly (for example, in 2015 24% of catastrophic OOPs was inpatient, then in 2016 it was 16.5% and then it was back up to 27.8% by 2017) but perhaps this also linked to the reforms (I can't remember all the details now). Does this shift make sense? Only one explanation: In 2016 number of visits in PHC facilities per person was maximum – 3.9, and one of the reasons is the introduction of an electronic prescription and the mandatory requirement for Tbilisi medical institutions to participate in a universal health program.

·         Columns N to R of column 10 are missing (also J to M was calculated in a different way but I fixed it... see the attached file). Mamuca changed it (see attached table)

·         Column 3 row T of table 13 seems too low... perhaps it was copy pasted wrong? I think it should be 10.6% (see B2 of table 10) but good to double check. Mamuca changed it (see attached table)

Thank you again to give us possibility see our reform results in numbers…

 

With best regards, Keti

 

 

Dear Keti

 

Thank you very much for your email and work on the FP analysis for 2016 and 2017. Sorry I was slow to respond – I was on leave when your email came and since being back in the office I have been dealing with the back log.

 

I hope all is well and you are adjusting to life with a new minister!

 

Jon has had a look at the results and his comments are:

 

·         Catastrophic incidence really increases a lot by 2017. Is there any obvious reason for this?

·         There is a weird shift in catastrophic OOPs by structure in 2016 where inpatient falls and outpatient increases... but then in 2017 the inpatient share returns to something close to what it was in 2015 and before. We should ask them to double check that the categories have been defined correctly (for example, in 2015 24% of catastrophic OOPs was inpatient, then in 2016 it was 16.5% and then it was back up to 27.8% by 2017) but perhaps this also linked to the reforms (I can't remember all the details now). Does this shift make sense?

·         Columns N to R of column 10 are missing (also J to M was calculated in a different way but I fixed it... see the attached file).

·         Column 3 row T of table 13 seems too low... perhaps it was copy pasted wrong? I think it should be 10.6% (see B2 of table 10) but good to double check.

Please have a look and let us know what you think –

 

With thanks and best wishes

 

Sarah

 

 

Dear Sarah,

 

I hope you are doing well.

 

I am sending excel files for Financial Protection - 2016-2017.

 

Final draft report I will send after two weeks.

 

With best regards, Keti

 

 

Ketevan Goginashvili, MPH

Head of Health Policy Division

Health Care Department

Ministry of Internally displaced Persons

from  Occupied Territories,

Labor, Health and Social Affairs

 

144 Tsereteli Ave

Tbilisi 0119, Georgia

Tel: +995 32 251 00 38 ext 1108

Mob: 995 577717984