The 2nd HPD report - Health Policy Monitor

More documents

Recommendations

Info

❒ International organizations ❒ Media ❒ Individual opinion leaders ❒ Other driving forces pushing the idea or innovation (please describe): Approach of idea The approach of the idea is best described as: ❒ New ❒ Renewed (First voiced, approx. year of entering debate, country of origin?) ❒ An amendment (Of which reform/bill/legislation?) 5.1.3 Innovation or model project Are there any (small-scale) examples of innovation (experiences)? ❒ No ❒ Yes, at the local or regional level: within institutions: as a pilot project: other: 101
5.2 Policy papers and stakeholder positions How were or are other stakeholders/affected groups positioned towards this idea or policy and its main purpose? Who opposes/opposed this idea or policy and why? Has the idea or policy been accepted by relevant actors; or was it abandoned? Was a policy paper formulated? By whom? Who held the leadership role in bringing forward this idea or policy? Were there alliances between stakeholders in support of the idea or new policy? Who mediated conflicts of interest between stakeholders? Structured summary Q 5.2 (optional) Actors: Position toward policy In the following table, please indicate the position of the major players toward the policy described. For groups or actors not positioned yet or not holding any stakes in the process, do not mark any box. The middle box should be used for neutral actors or those having voiced mixed reactions. In case of the latter, please give details in the space provided above. A word of caution: A table can only illustrate positions, influences or priorities to some extent. It is not a tool for the analysis of alliances or more complex interaction. For more detailed descriptions, in-depth analysis and/or expert estimates (e.g. concerning the likeliness of success of a health policy or idea, chances of implementation, interest group alliances etc.) please use the space provided above. Stakeholder position toward development of idea or policy: Actor/Position very strong strong neutral weak none Government Parliament Providers Payers 102
Page 1 and 2:
Reinhard Busse, Sophia Schlette (ed
Page 4 and 5:
Reinhard Busse, Sophia Schlette (ed
Page 6 and 7:
Contents Editorial ................
Page 8:
Newsflash .........................
Page 11 and 12:
Partner institutions were selected
Page 13 and 14:
- Relevance and scope - Impact on s
Page 15 and 16:
The figure below illustrates a poli
Page 18 and 19:
Introduction This second issue of
Page 20 and 21:
the extent to which private financi
Page 22 and 23:
Health and Aging Long life expectan
Page 24 and 25:
To address such a broad spectrum of
Page 26 and 27:
The “National Strategy for an Age
Page 28 and 29:
Finally, the reform introduces pers
Page 30 and 31:
Idea Pilot Policy Paper Legislation
Page 32 and 33:
Sources and further reading: Depart
Page 34 and 35:
insurance. An employee who requests
Page 36 and 37:
Sources and further reading: “Obs
Page 38 and 39:
independent life), an in-kind benef
Page 40 and 41:
Reform of long-term care coverage A
Page 42 and 43:
Idea Pilot Policy Paper Legislation
Page 44 and 45:
ciated with removing assets testing
Page 46 and 47:
Sources and further reading: Depart
Page 48 and 49:
coverage only to seniors enrolled i
Page 50 and 51:
Pharmaceutical Policies Pharmaceuti
Page 52 and 53: eimbursement rate is 35 percent. Mo
Page 54 and 55: From 1994 to 2003, prices for all p
Page 56 and 57: keep products eligible for reimburs
Page 58 and 59: Austria: Criteria for reimbursable
Page 60 and 61: Federation of Austrian Social Secur
Page 62 and 63: Idea Pilot Policy Paper Legislation
Page 64 and 65: Spain has now introduced a variety
Page 68 and 69: Human Resources for Health The past
Page 70 and 71: California: First-in-nation rules o
Page 74 and 75: Canada: A co-coordinated and compre
Page 76 and 77: Newsflash In this section, we follo
Page 78 and 79: ance (“Haut Conseil pour l’Aven
Page 80 and 81: law will allow some 14 percent of C
Page 82 and 83: Lieberman) proposed to finance the
Page 84 and 85: The policy emphasizes personal resp
Page 86 and 87: Canada: Independent council for qua
Page 88 and 89: New Zealand: Improving quality—a
Page 90 and 91: 1 International Monitor on Health P
Page 92 and 93: - Degree of innovation (compared wi
Page 94 and 95: 9. Long-term care: Long-term care a
Page 96 and 97: Please photocopy and fill out the f
Page 98 and 99: 6 Responsiveness to and empowerment
Page 100 and 101: Sources of information Please indic
Page 104 and 105: Patients Civil society Private sect
Page 106 and 107: Structured summary Q 5.4 (optional)
Page 108 and 109: 7. Rating this policy (expert opini
Page 110 and 111: Call for Support International Netw
Page 112 and 113: Topics could be - Integrated care a
show all

The 2nd HPD report - Health Policy Monitor

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?