Safaricom’s decision to hire Savannah Informatics to fix the Social Health Authority (SHA) claims portal has raised questions, especially considering the Sh104 billion budget allocated to the project.
This consortium, which includes Apeiro Limited and Konvergenz Network Solutions, was expected to deliver an Integrated Healthcare Information Technology System (IHITS) to support SHA operations.
However, the rollout has been marred by technical failures, operational delays, and public outcry, calling into question whether this investment was justified.
The SHA system, designed to replace the National Hospital Insurance Fund (NHIF), was meant to streamline healthcare access through a digital platform.
Unfortunately, trials in Marsabit and Tharaka Nithi counties revealed major problems.
Patients, including those undergoing dialysis, were turned away because their details were missing from the system, while hospitals struggled with unclear payment processes.
This chaos exposed significant flaws in the system’s planning and execution.
Critics argue that these issues could have been avoided if the government had opted to upgrade the existing NHIF system, which would have cost only Sh700 million compared to the Sh104 billion allocated for this new platform.
A particularly contentious issue is the single-sourcing of the project under the Specially Permitted Procurement Procedure (SPPP).
Many have accused Safaricom of leveraging its established reputation to shield the shortcomings of its partners, especially Apeiro Limited.
Despite holding the majority stake, Apeiro has limited experience in handling healthcare IT systems of this scale.
Observers see this arrangement as a way to deflect scrutiny from potential conflicts of interest and questionable decision-making during the project’s planning stages.
Legal and regulatory challenges have further complicated the SHA rollout.
The system’s poor performance led to repeated delays, with implementation pushed back multiple times before finally being launched in October.
Even then, the digital platform was not fully operational, leaving hospitals and healthcare providers in a state of confusion.
The rushed transition disregarded input from key stakeholders, including private healthcare providers, who had proposed a phased implementation to minimize disruption.
The lack of preparation has left hospitals struggling to function, with many unable to meet basic operational costs like paying staff and acquiring supplies.
Critics also question Safaricom’s corporate priorities in this matter. While the company often promotes its successful digital platforms like M-Pesa and the Hustler Fund, the SHA project reveals a troubling focus on financial gain over public welfare.
The ballooning costs, combined with the consortium’s lack of transparency and the system’s ongoing failures, have undermined public trust.
Many now view the SHA system as a wasteful venture that prioritizes profits over the needs of Kenyan citizens, raising serious concerns about accountability for the billions spent on this flawed project.
