• During emergencies, local providers, health workers, or schoolteachers are more likely to achieve better results when they receive (financial) resources to respond to the crisis, rather than when external emergency organizations take ownership of the services.
• To finance FBP emergency interventions, the government and partners should allocate a pre-established budget. External emergency assistance is welcome but should focus on technical assistance, training, and coaching, and should avoid centralized, input-oriented interventions.
• In an emergency, health facilities, local health authorities, and regional contract development and contracting (CDV) agencies develop emergency business plans to address the crisis.

The PBF emergency instruments can include :

1. Increasing the percentage of patients exempted from care at health facilities, for example, from 10% to 25%, 50%, or 100%, for which PBF subsidies will be paid;
2. Requesting one or more PBF quality improvement bonuses ranging from USD 750 to USD 5,000 (depending on the level).

• Local authorities, in collaboration with the regional contract development & verification agency and the health facilities, decide which health facilities will benefit from these PBF emergency instruments during district validation committee meetings.
• During a crisis, the government should aim to use accredited national public and private wholesale distributors that compete, from which providers buy their inputs, rather than relying on a single monopolistic central medical store.