IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpp/issued/v47y2021i3p421-438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the Profit Motive Matter? COVID-19 Prevention and Management in Ontario Long-Term-Care Homes

Author

Listed:
  • Kristen Pue
  • Daniel Westlake
  • Alix Jansen

Abstract

We introduce evidence that for-profit long-term-care providers are associated with less successful outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak management. We introduce two sets of theoretical arguments that predict variation in service quality by provider type: those that deal with the institution of contracting (innovative competition vs. erosive competition) and those that address organizational features of for-profit, non-profit, and government actors (profit seeking, cross-subsidization, and future investment). We contextualize these arguments through a discussion of how contracting operates in Ontario long-term care. That discussion leads us to exclude the institutional arguments while retaining the arguments about organizational features as our three hypotheses. Using outbreak data as of February 2021, we find that government-run long-term-care homes surpassed for-profit and non-profit homes in outbreak management, consistent with an earlier finding from Stall et al. (2020). Non-profit homes outperform for-profit homes but are outperformed by government-run homes. These results are consistent with the expectations derived from two theoretical arguments—profit seeking and cross-subsidization—and inconsistent with a third—capacity for future investment.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristen Pue & Daniel Westlake & Alix Jansen, 2021. "Does the Profit Motive Matter? COVID-19 Prevention and Management in Ontario Long-Term-Care Homes," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 47(3), pages 421-438, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:47:y:2021:i:3:p:421-438
    DOI: 10.3138/cpp.2020-151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/cpp.2020-151
    Download Restriction: access restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3138/cpp.2020-151?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:47:y:2021:i:3:p:421-438. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Iver Chong (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/cpp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.