Do hospitals respond to greater autonomy? Evidence from the English NHS
AbstractFoundation Trusts (FTs) were introduced in the English NHS in 2004/5 and gave NHS Trusts the opportunity to become independent not-for-profit public benefit corporations. Whilst remaining in the public sector, FTs were granted greater autonomy than non-FTs. The reform was intended to create incentives for providers to deliver higher quality services in the most efficient way. This paper examines the impact of the FT policy on hospital performance, as proxied by measures of financial management, quality of care and staff satisfaction. Results suggest that generally FTs perform better than non-FTs. However, these differences appear to be long-standing rather than the effect of the FT policy per se and we find some evidence of a convergence in hospital performance between FTs and non-FTs.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Centre for Health Economics, University of York in its series Working Papers with number 064cherp.
Length: 32 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2011
Date of revision:
Foundation Trusts; hospital reform; performance indicators;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
- I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
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.:
- Russell Mannion & Maria Goddard & Michael Kuhn & Angela Bate, 2005. "Decentralisation Strategies and Provider Incentives in Healthcare: Evidence from the English National Health Service," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 4(1), pages 47-54.
- Allen, Pauline, 2006. "New localism in the English National Health Service: What is it for?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(2-3), pages 244-252, December.
- Sofia Dimakou & David Parkin & Nancy Devlin & John Appleby, 2009. "Identifying the impact of government targets on waiting times in the NHS," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, March.
- Rowena Jacobs & Diane Dawson, 2003. "Hospital efficiency targets," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(8), pages 669-684.
- Propper, Carol & Sutton, Matt & Whitnall, Carolyn & Windmeijer, Frank, 2010.
"Incentives and targets in hospital care: Evidence from a natural experiment,"
Journal of Public Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 94(3-4), pages 318-335, April.
- Carol Propper & Matt Sutton & Carolyn Whitnall & Frank Windmeijer, 2008. "Incentives and Targets in Hospital Care: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 08/205, Department of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
- George France & Francesco Taroni & Andrea Donatini, 2005. "The Italian health-care system," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(S1), pages S187-S202.
- 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.
- Giorgia Marini & Marisa Miraldo & Rowena Jacobs & Maria Goddard, 2008. "Giving greater financial independence to hospitals-does it make a difference? The case of English NHS Trusts," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(6), pages 751-775.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Frances Sharp).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.