IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

A “politically robust” experimental design for public policy evaluation, with application to the Mexican Universal Health Insurance program

  • Gary King

    (Harvard University)

  • Emmanuela Gakidou

    (Harvard University)

  • Nirmala Ravishankar

    (Harvard University)

  • Ryan T. Moore

    (Harvard University)

  • Jason Lakin

    (Harvard University)

  • Manett Vargas

    (National Commission for Social Protection in Health, Ministry of Health, Mexico)

  • Martha Mar�a Téllez-Rojo

    (Instituto Nacional de Salud P�blica (National Institute of Public Health), Mexico)

  • Juan Eugenio Hernández �vila

    (Instituto Nacional de Salud P�blica (National Institute of Public Health), Mexico)

  • Mauricio Hernández �vila

    (Undersecretary for Prevention and Health Promotion, Secretar�a de Salud (Ministry of Health), Mexico)

  • Héctor Hernández Llamas

    (Conestadistica)

We develop an approach to conducting large-scale randomized public policy experiments intended to be more robust to the political interventions that have ruined some or all parts of many similar previous efforts. Our proposed design is insulated from selection bias in some circumstances even if we lose observations; our inferences can still be unbiased even if politics disrupts any two of the three steps in our analytical procedures; and other empirical checks are available to validate the overall design. We illustrate with a design and empirical validation of an evaluation of the Mexican Seguro Popular de Salud (Universal Health Insurance) program we are conducting. Seguro Popular, which is intended to grow to provide medical care, drugs, preventative services, and financial health protection to the 50 million Mexicans without health insurance, is one of the largest health reforms of any country in the last two decades. The evaluation is also large scale, constituting one of the largest policy experiments to date and what may be the largest randomized health policy experiment ever. © 2007 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management

If 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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/pam.20279
File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Journal of Policy Analysis and Management.

Volume (Year): 26 (2007)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 479-506

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:26:y:2007:i:3:p:479-506
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home

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.:

as in new window
  1. Holzer, Harry J. & Quigley, John M. & Raphael, Steven, 2004. "Public Transit and the Spatial Distribution of Minority Employment: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy, Working Paper Series qt0f3725dm, Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy.
  2. Steven Glazerman & Daniel Mayer & Paul Decker, 2006. "Alternative routes to teaching: The impacts of Teach for America on student achievement and other outcomes," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(1), pages 75-96.
  3. Glenn Harrison & John List, 2004. "Field experiments," Artefactual Field Experiments 00058, The Field Experiments Website.
  4. David H. Greenberg & Charles Michalopoulos & Philip K. Robin, 2006. "Do experimental and nonexperimental evaluations give different answers about the effectiveness of government-funded training programs?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 523-552.
  5. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1995. "Assessing the Case for Social Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 85-110, Spring.
  6. Elizabeth Ty Wilde & Robinson Hollister, 2007. "How close is close enough? Evaluating propensity score matching using data from a class size reduction experiment," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 455-477.
  7. William G. Howell, 2004. "Dynamic selection effects in means-tested, urban school voucher programs," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 225-250.
  8. Barnard J. & Frangakis C.E. & Hill J.L. & Rubin D.B., 2003. "Principal Stratification Approach to Broken Randomized Experiments: A Case Study of School Choice Vouchers in New York City," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 98, pages 299-323, January.
  9. Michael J. Camasso & Radha Jagannathan & Carol Harvey & Mark Killingsworth, 2003. "The use of client surveys to gauge the threat of contamination in welfare reform experiments," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 207-223.
  10. Thomas S. Dee & Benjamin J. Keys, 2004. "Does merit pay reward good teachers? Evidence from a randomized experiment," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 471-488.
  11. Daniel Ho & Kosuke Imai & Gary King & Elizabeth A. Stuart, . "MatchIt: Nonparametric Preprocessing for Parametric Causal Inference," Journal of Statistical Software, American Statistical Association, vol. 42(i08).
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:26:y:2007:i:3:p:479-506. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.