Principal uses of EPHS costing outputs for different types of policy making/decisions
| From responses to Q27 (online supplemental annex 1) | Mean score* | Afghanistan | Ethiopia | Pakistan | Somalia | Sudan |
| Advisory committee meetings | 2.2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 0 |
| Prioritisation of interventions | 1.8 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 0 |
| Implementation scenarios (packages) | 1.8 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
| Business case/resource gaps for funders | 1.8 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1 |
| Service delivery planning | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Health workforce planning | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 |
| Contracting-out (PPPs, NGOs, etc) | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Annual budgeting—national/local | 0.8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Medicines, equipment, supplies procurement | 0.8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Implementation at different levels | 0.6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Infrastructure investment plans | 0.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Quality evaluation of current services | 0.6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Long-term budgeting—national/local | 0.4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
*The score is obtained by attributing a value of 3 when the exercise had been determinant, 2 when it had been useful, 1 when it was planned to be used, and 0 when it had neither been used not was planned to be used.
EPHS, essential package of health services; NGOs, non-governmental organisations; PPPs, Public-private partnerships.