Browsing by Author "Taderera, Hope"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Medical staff attrition in local authorities experiences from Harare City Council Maternity Clinics (2007-2008)(Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 2012) Madhekeni, Alois; Taderera, HopeThe years 2007 and 2008 are of special reckoned in the history of Zimbabwe as the economy plunged into a meltdown and professionalism suddenly became an irrelevant status. Institutions in the public sector struggled for relevance as they frantically sought to retain skilled and qualified medical personnel. The maternity service delivery system in local authorities could not escape from the crisis hence the study sought to explore the degree of staff attrition in the sector, major causes, effects and measures of reducing staff attrition. The study involved the collection and analysis of data from 12 council clinics providing maternity services for the period 2007 – 2008. The authors argue that, the state of the economy has got a strong bearing on the level of staff attrition in organisations. Since medical staff are skilled professionals they can easily leave for greener “pastures” hence the need for Councils to improve working conditions.Item Welfare pluralism in health: Assessing Zimbabwe’s policy response to HIV/AIDS with reference to Mbare Distrct, Harare(International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2012) Taderera, Hope; Madhekeni, AloisThe article is on Welfare Pluralism and focuses on Zimbabwe’s policy responses to HIV/AIDS with reference to Mbare Disrict, Harare. Quantitative primary data was systematically collected from a sample of individuals from 159 households drawn from Ward 11 of Mbare. Qualitative primary data was collected from key informants who included health service providers, community leaders and individuals infected or affected by HIV/AIDS. Secondary data was collected through a documentary search. Findings from an impact assessment survey in Ward 11, based upon a rating scale of 1 to 5, revealed a highest average rating of 3 for the voluntary sector, followed by another good rating of 3 for government institutions and a fair rating of 2, 5 for the private sector. The informal sector received a lowest poor rating of 1, 6 which indicated gaps that are still to be exploited to maximise gains from joint interventions.