This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Giving greater financial independence to hospitals-does it make a difference? The case of English NHS Trusts

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Giorgia Marini (Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK)
Marisa Miraldo (Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK)
Rowena Jacobs (Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK)
Maria Goddard (Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In 2003 a new type of provider organisation, the Foundation Trust (FT), was introduced in England, and the best performing NHS hospitals were able to apply for 'Foundation status'. FTs enjoy greater financial flexibility and are subject to less central monitoring and control. The phased introduction of FTs represents an opportunity to examine whether the new financial structures facing FTs have produced any differences in financial performance compared with non-FTs. We use difference in difference methods to examine whether Foundation status had a significant effect on financial management. We find that Foundation status has had a limited impact in terms of acting as an instrument to signal strong financial management of FTs. This result may reflect the relatively early stage of the FT process or may be due to the fact that all types of Trusts are experiencing a challenging financial environment, including the introduction of a prospective payment system. However, we explore the nature of the trends emerging over time and discuss the implications of our findings for policy. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/hec.1292
File Format: text/html
File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.

Volume (Year): 17 (2008)
Issue (Month): 6 ()
Pages: 751-775
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:17:y:2008:i:6:p:751-775

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Diane Dawson & Hugh Gravelle & Rowena Jacobs & Stephen Martin & Peter C. Smith, 2007. "The effects of expanding patient choice of provider on waiting times: evidence from a policy experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(2), pages 113-128. [Downloadable!]
  2. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity score matching methods for non-experimental causal studies," Discussion Papers 0102-14, Columbia University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  4. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2002. "Alternative approaches to evaluation in empirical microeconomics," CeMMAP working papers CWP10/02, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Mundlak, Yair, 1978. "On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 69-85, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1017-1098, September.
    Other versions:
  7. Croxson, B. & Propper, C. & Perkins, A., 2001. "Do doctors respond to financial incentives? UK family doctors and the GP fundholder scheme," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 375-398, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Heckman, James J & Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra E, 1997. "Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 64(4), pages 605-54, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Sascha O. Becker & Andrea Ichino, 2002. "Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(4), pages 358-377, November. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? It is the publishers that input data about their publications, as there is no staff at RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-16.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.