Devolving authority for health care in Canada's provinces: 2. Backgrounds, resources and activities of board members

To obtain information from the members of the boards of devolved health care authorities and evaluate their orientations in meeting the expectations of provincial governments, local providers and community members.

Mail survey, conducted in cooperation with the devolved authorities, in the summer of 1995.

Three provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island) with established boards and 2 (British Columbia and Nova Scotia) with immature boards.

All 791 members of boards of devolved authorities in the 5 provinces, of whom 514 (65%) responded.

Sociodemographic background, training, experience and activities of board members as well as their use of information.

There were systematic differences between established and immature boards in regard to training, information use and actual and desired activities. Members spent 35 hours per month, on average, on work for their board. Members were largely middle-aged, well educated and well off. Only 36% were employed full time. Nine out of 10 had previous experience on boards, more often in health care than in social services. They were least pleased with their training in setting priorities and assessing health care needs and most pleased with their training in participating effectively in meetings and understanding their roles and responsibilities. The information for decision-making most available to them was information on service costs (68% said it was available "most of the time" or "always") and utilization (64%); the least available information was that on key informants' opinions (47%), service benefits (37%) and citizens' preferences (28%). Board activity was dominated by setting priorities and assessing needs, secondarily occupied with ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of services and allocating funds, and least concerned with delivering services and raising revenue. The match between activities desired by members and actual activities was significantly poorer for members of immature boards than for those of established boards.

The responses concerning these structural variables suggest that board members are most likely to meet the expectations of provincial governments. Fewer appear well equipped to accommodate the views of their providers and even fewer to incorporate the perspectives of their community.