A framework to assess welfare mix and service provision models in health care and social welfare: case studies of two prominent Italian regions

Abstract

BackgroundThe mechanisms through which the relationships among public institutions, private providers and families affect care and service provision systems are puzzling. How can we understand the mechanisms in these contexts? Which elements should we explore to capture the complexity of care provision? The aim of our study is to provide a framework that can help read and reframe these puzzling care provision mechanisms in a welfare mix context.MethodsFirst, we develop a theoretical framework for understanding how service provision occurs in care systems that are characterised by a variety of relationships between multiple actors, using an evidence-based approach that looks at both public and private expenditures and the number of users relative to the level of needs coverage and compared with declared values and political rhetoric. Second, we test this framework in two case studies built on data from two prominent Italian regions, Lombardy and Emilia-Romagna. We argue that service provision models depend on the interplay among six conceptual elements: policy values, governance rules, resources, nature of the providers, service standards and eligibility criteria.ResultsOur empirical study shows that beneath the relevant differences in values and political rhetoric between the case studies of the two Italian regions, there is a surprising isomorphism in service standards and the levels of covering the population’s needs.ConclusionThe suggested framework appears to be effective and feasible; it fosters interdisciplinary approaches and supports policy-making discussions. This study may contribute to deepening knowledge about public care service provision and institutional arrangements, which can be used to promote more effective reforms and may advance future research. Although the framework was tested on the Italian welfare system, it can be used to assess many different systems.

Long-term care coverage and its relationship with hospital care: Lessons from Italy on coordination among care-settings

“…LTC nursing homes are co-financed by the regional health-care budget and families' co-payments (the latter should cover up to 50% of hotel and living costs). 39 Each regional government has the power to independently decide the number of nursing-home beds to contract and finance, as well as the regional locations that receive this funding.…”

“…Consequently, regional governments were made responsible for the governance of welfare policies, and especially for managing the public budget devoted to health and social care and directing the network of actors who provide such services. 39 This autonomy has led to inter-region differences regarding the features and specificities of such systems and, in some cases, has resulted in the creation of guidelines that contradict those of the national legislator. 40 In the present paper, to describe LTC systems we have used several different sources:…”

A Bottom-up picture of intra-national welfare regimes: the case of marginalised communities in Puerto Rico

“…The state, family and market are traditional actors that provide one or more rationales for the production and allocation of resources. There are multiple papers in the welfare regime literature conceptualising the state, market and family as 'actors' in the welfare-mix (Heuer, Leruth, Mau, & Zimmermann, 2016;Longo et al, 2015;Marcel & Rivera, 2008). 'Welfare actors' and 'welfare providers' are used interchangeably in this paper.…”

Why the Discretion Mix Matters: Understanding the Transformation of Long-term Care Services

“…15 Although provisional and financial aspects are the most common conceptualizations of the welfare mix, some authors emphasized that it captures both the organization of different financial or provisional matrices and the organization of various norms and logics. 16,17 …”