Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 398-427 |
| Number of pages | 30 |
| Journal | Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics |
| Volume | 73 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| Publication status | Published - 14 Nov 2010 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Abstract
This article evaluates the effects of a consumer-directed home care programme (Personal Budgets) compared with the standard home care programmes of the German long-term care insurance (LTCI). The evaluation makes use of a random assignment into a treatment group receiving personal budgets and a control group receiving either in-kind benefits (agency care) or cash payments. Compared with agency care, personal budgets extend the support by independent providers, but leave health outcomes unchanged. Compared with cash payments, personal budgets tend to improve health outcomes, but double LTCI spending due to a strong crowding out of informal care by formal care.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Mathematics(all)
- Statistics and Probability
- Social Sciences(all)
- Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
- Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)
- Economics and Econometrics
- Decision Sciences(all)
- Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 73, No. 3, 14.11.2010, p. 398-427.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Crowding Out Informal Care?
T2 - Evidence from a Field Experiment in Germany
AU - Arntz, Melanie
AU - Thomsen, Stephan L.
PY - 2010/11/14
Y1 - 2010/11/14
N2 - This article evaluates the effects of a consumer-directed home care programme (Personal Budgets) compared with the standard home care programmes of the German long-term care insurance (LTCI). The evaluation makes use of a random assignment into a treatment group receiving personal budgets and a control group receiving either in-kind benefits (agency care) or cash payments. Compared with agency care, personal budgets extend the support by independent providers, but leave health outcomes unchanged. Compared with cash payments, personal budgets tend to improve health outcomes, but double LTCI spending due to a strong crowding out of informal care by formal care.
AB - This article evaluates the effects of a consumer-directed home care programme (Personal Budgets) compared with the standard home care programmes of the German long-term care insurance (LTCI). The evaluation makes use of a random assignment into a treatment group receiving personal budgets and a control group receiving either in-kind benefits (agency care) or cash payments. Compared with agency care, personal budgets extend the support by independent providers, but leave health outcomes unchanged. Compared with cash payments, personal budgets tend to improve health outcomes, but double LTCI spending due to a strong crowding out of informal care by formal care.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953311508&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-0084.2010.00616.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1468-0084.2010.00616.x
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:79953311508
VL - 73
SP - 398
EP - 427
JO - Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics
JF - Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics
SN - 0305-9049
IS - 3
ER -