TY - JOUR
T1 - Ownership, quality and prices of nursing homes in Australia
T2 - why greater private sector participation did not improve performance
AU - Yong, Jongsay
AU - Yang, Ou
AU - Zhang, Yuting
AU - Scott, Anthony
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Partnership Centre for Health System Sustainability (grant ID: 9100002) and partly supported by the Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research, Australian Research Council (CE170100005). Y. Zhang received funding support from an Australian Research Council Australian Future Fellowship (ID: FT200100630).
Funding Information:
We gratefully acknowledge funding supports from the NHMRC Partnership Centre for Health System Sustainability, and the ARC Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research. Y. Zhang acknowledges the funding support from ARC Australian Future Fellowship. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We are grateful to the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety for providing the data, especially to Grant Whitesman, Samuel Bye and Thomas Pearce for assistance.
Funding Information:
We gratefully acknowledge funding supports from the NHMRC Partnership Centre for Health System Sustainability, and the ARC Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research. Y. Zhang acknowledges the funding support from ARC Australian Future Fellowship. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We are grateful to the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety for providing the data, especially to Grant Whitesman, Samuel Bye and Thomas Pearce for assistance.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2021/11
Y1 - 2021/11
N2 - Objective: This study examines whether greater private-sector participation in aged care can lead to better outcomes by comparing quality of care and prices of residential aged care facilities across three ownership types: government-owned, private not-for-profit and for- profit facilities. Australia, like many other countries, has been implementing market-oriented reforms aiming to promote greater consumer choice and increase the role of markets and private-sector participation in aged care. Methods: Using retrospective facility-level data, the study relates several measures of quality of care and a measure of price to ownership types while controlling for facility characteristics. The data covered six financial years (2013/14–2018/19) and contained 2,900 residential aged-care facilities, capturing almost all facilities in Australia. About 55% were private not-for-profit, 30% private for-profit and 15% government-owned. Results: Government-owned facilities provide higher quality of care in most quality measures and charge the lowest average price than private for-profit and not-for-profit facilities. Discussion: Reforms promoting private-sector participation in aged care are unlikely to result in effective competition to drive quality up or prices down unless sources of market failure are addressed. In Australia, the lack of public reporting of quality and the complex pricing structure are key issues that prevent market forces and consumer choice from working as intended.
AB - Objective: This study examines whether greater private-sector participation in aged care can lead to better outcomes by comparing quality of care and prices of residential aged care facilities across three ownership types: government-owned, private not-for-profit and for- profit facilities. Australia, like many other countries, has been implementing market-oriented reforms aiming to promote greater consumer choice and increase the role of markets and private-sector participation in aged care. Methods: Using retrospective facility-level data, the study relates several measures of quality of care and a measure of price to ownership types while controlling for facility characteristics. The data covered six financial years (2013/14–2018/19) and contained 2,900 residential aged-care facilities, capturing almost all facilities in Australia. About 55% were private not-for-profit, 30% private for-profit and 15% government-owned. Results: Government-owned facilities provide higher quality of care in most quality measures and charge the lowest average price than private for-profit and not-for-profit facilities. Discussion: Reforms promoting private-sector participation in aged care are unlikely to result in effective competition to drive quality up or prices down unless sources of market failure are addressed. In Australia, the lack of public reporting of quality and the complex pricing structure are key issues that prevent market forces and consumer choice from working as intended.
KW - Australia
KW - Long-term care
KW - Market-oriented reforms
KW - Policy analysis
KW - Residential aged care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85115745967&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2021.09.005
DO - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2021.09.005
M3 - Article
C2 - 34565611
AN - SCOPUS:85115745967
SN - 0168-8510
VL - 125
SP - 1475
EP - 1481
JO - Health Policy
JF - Health Policy
IS - 11
ER -