20Jul 2017

DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PUBLIC HEALTH.

  • Jodhpur School of Public Health (JSPH), Maulana Azad University Jodhpur, India.
Crossref Cited-by Linking logo
  • Abstract
  • References
  • Cite This Article as
  • Corresponding Author

Rational: The public-sector pharmaceutical supply system in Afghanistan has been a collective effort of the Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) and international and national partners to ensure an uninterrupted supply of good-quality, essential medicines to health facilities providing the Basic Package for Health Services (BPHS) and Essential Package for Hospital Services (EPHS). Supplier performance is critical to the procurement process. Monitoring suppliers? performance is one of the World Health Organization?s (WHO?s) recommended procedures to achieve its strategic objectives of pharmaceutical procurement. Objective: The objectives of the paper was to apply the identified common criteria for Measuring Pharmaceutical Suppliers? Performance at BPHS/EPHS implementers and Hospitals in Afghanistan. Method: This study was a cross-sectional survey. In total, 34 organizations were selected for the survey, including 13 government entities, 13 National hospital, 9 INGO, 8 NGO and 1 public private partnership. Population: The target respondents were the staff in charge of pharmaceutical procurement in all the BPHS/EPHS implementers, government entities, and national hospitals that carry out pharmaceutical procurement. Time Frame: The study took 24 weeks from the start to the preparation of the first draft report. Results: In total, 34 organizations were selected for the survey, and 29 (85%) responded to the questionnaire. All 29 organizations (100%) purchased pharmaceuticals from the local market; in particular, from importers. Of them, four (14%) also purchased directly from the international market. Twenty organizations (69%) monitored the performance of their suppliers. Eight (40%) of those organizations monitoring the performance of their suppliers did so at regular intervals. Of a total of 61 suppliers, 57 (93%) local suppliers were registered in Afghanistan, and four (7%) international suppliers were registered in other countries: one in Ireland, one in Netherlands, and two in India. Fifty-five (90%) of the 61 suppliers are local importers. Of the 61

  1. Abdolshah, M., 2013. A Review of Quality Criteria Supporting Supplier Selection. Journal of Quality and Reliability Engineering.
  2. CA, D., 2008. Department of General Services, CA. Supplier Performance Report, l.: s.n.
  3. Cormican, K. & Cunningham, M., 2007. Supplier performance evaluation: lessons from a large multinational organisation (abstract). Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 18(4), pp. 352-366.
  4. Enyinda, C. I., Emeka, D. & Bell-Hanyes, J., 2010. A model for quantifying strategic supplier selection: Evidence from a generic pharmaceutical firm supply chain. International Journal of Business, Marketing, and Decision Sciences, 3(2), pp. 25-44.
  5. Gordon, S., 2005. Seven Steps to measure supplier performance. http://spce.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/1805.pdf.
  6. Harton, S., 2004. Creating and using suppliers? scorecards, l.: Contract Management.
  7. Lindsey, M., n.d. Supplier Performance Ratings - Scorecards, Rankings, and Awarding Business, l.: s.n.
  8. Liu, Y., n.d. A Case Study of Evaluating Supplier?s Selection Criteria in a Steel Bars Manufacturer. [Online] Available at: http://www1.rdoffice.ndhu.edu.tw/exchange/abroad/abroad99/35_paper.pdf [Accessed 30 April 2015].
  9. MoPH_GDPA, 2010. Coordinated Procurement and Distribution System (CPDS) Governance Framework. l.:s.n.
  10. NC, D., 2013. North Carolina Department of Administration. Contractor/Supplier Performance Evaluation Report. Version 2.. [Online] Available at: http://www.doa.nc.gov/pandc/Documents/Contract-Administration-and-Monitoring-Guide/Contractor-SupplierPerformanceEvaluationRepo [Accessed 6 May 2015].
  11. Ongeri, B., 2013. Technical Report of Supplier Performance Monitoring for 2012 at Central medical Store, Namibia. Submitted to the US Agency for International Development by the Supply Chain Management System (SCMS), l.: s.n.
  12. Pal, O., Gupta, A. K. & Garg, R., 2013. Supplier Selection Criteria and Methods in Supply Chains: A Review. International Journal of Social, Education, Economics and Management Engineering, 7(10), pp. 1395-1401.
  13. PQG, 2010. A Guide to Supply Chain Risk Management for the Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Industries and their Suppliers. Pharmaceutical Quality Group. [Online] Available at: http://www.pqg.org/pharma/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/PQG-Guide-to-Supply-Chain-Risk-Management-V-1-0-2 [Accessed 1 2 2014].
  14. Salama, H., 2005. The importance of supplier management-A sponsor?s perspective on achieving operational success. Contract Pharma, 23 August.
  15. Su?rez Bello, M. J., 2003. A case study approach to the supplier selection process, l.: A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Engineering in Management Systems Engineering at the University of Puerto Rico Mayag?ez Campus.
  16. University of Exeter, n.d. Procurement Manual: Good Practice 4. Assessing Supplier performance, l.: s.n.
  17. WHO/WPRO, 2002. Practical Guidelines on Pharmaceutical Procurement for Countries with Small Procurement Agencies.
  18. WHO, 1999. Operational principles for good pharmaceutical procurement.
  19. WHO, 2010. WHO good distribution practices for pharmaceutical products, l.: s.n.

[Mohammad Osman Zaki PHARM and Ajmal Yadgari. (2017); DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PUBLIC HEALTH. Int. J. of Adv. Res. 5 (Jul). 1102-1144] (ISSN 2320-5407). www.journalijar.com

Mohammad Osman Zaki

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/4821      
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/4821

Download Full Paper

Download PDF No. of Downloads: 55 | No. of Views: 301