Related Experiment Videos
A cost function analysis of residential services for adults with a learning disability
A Shiell1, C Pettipher, N Raynes
1Centre for Health Economics, University of York, England.
Health Economics
|October 1, 1993
Summary
Community care for learning disabilities in England shows significant variation in costs and quality. Client needs and care approach impact expenses, not facility features. Private providers may offer savings.
Area of Science:
- Health Services Research
- Social Policy
- Disability Studies
Background:
- UK policy shifted towards community care for learning disabilities, altering residential services.
- Existing research on community care costs and quality is conflicting.
- Evaluation of community residential facilities' cost-effectiveness and quality is timely.
Purpose of the Study:
- To analyze the costs and quality of staffed community residential facilities in England.
- To identify factors influencing cost variations in community care.
- To assess the relationship between care quality and cost.
Main Methods:
- Cost function analysis of a random stratified sample of community facilities (excluding London).
- Inclusion of case-mix factors (age, dependency, length of stay) and facility characteristics.
- Measurement of quality using client-oriented care regimes and community service utilization.
Main Results:
- Significant variation in both costs and quality of care across facilities.
- Client age, dependency, and length of stay were key cost drivers; facility features were not.
- Higher quality care (client-oriented, community-integrated) correlated positively with costs.
- Provider type generally had no cost impact, except for private for-profit facilities being less expensive.
Conclusions:
- Community residential care costs are primarily driven by client needs and care quality, not facility attributes.
- Client-centered and community-integrated care models are associated with higher costs but potentially better service quality.
- Policy makers should consider case-mix and quality when assessing cost-effectiveness of community residential facilities.