1 / 16

Louis Demers École nationale d’administration publique , Québec, Canada The 13 th International Conference on Integrate

Enhancing integrated : the case for subsidiarity. Louis Demers École nationale d’administration publique , Québec, Canada The 13 th International Conference on Integrated Care Berlin, Germany. April 11, 2013. Aims of the presentation.

rosina
Download Presentation

Louis Demers École nationale d’administration publique , Québec, Canada The 13 th International Conference on Integrate

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Enhancingintegrated: the case for subsidiarity Louis Demers Écolenationaled’administrationpublique, Québec, Canada The 13th International Conference on Integrated Care Berlin, Germany April 11, 2013

  2. Aims of the presentation • Discuss the healthreformbeingimplemented in Quebec in the light of threeprinciples (Deschênes Report, 1996): • resultsprimacy • subsidiarity • accountability • Show how the implementation of theseprinciples has impinged on health services integration • Presentsomelessonslearned

  3. The Deschênes Report (1996) • Senior public administrators • Mandated by the Minister of Health and Social Services • Make recommandations about the roles and responsabilities of central, regional and local authorities • Threeprinciples: resultsprimacy, subsidiarity and accountability

  4. ResultsPrimacy • Diagnosis: heavybureaucraticburden on operatives • Underlyinglogic: mistrust and search for uniformity • Solution: reducerules and set clear objectives for operatives

  5. Subsidiarity • A central authority should perform only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level • Primacy of the local level for the service users and the population • Regional and central levels in support of local actors

  6. Accountability • Resultsprimacy + subsidiarity = clear mandates and autonomy • Hence: possibility of makingoperativesresponsible for theirdecisions • The threeprinciples go hand in hand

  7. Implementation of the principles • The public administration reform • The Couillard Reform

  8. The public administration reform • Law on Public Administration (2000) • The « governance bill » (2001) • Health and social services sector: • Implentationstarting in 2004 • Multi-yearstrategic plans • Annual « management agreements »

  9. The Couillard Reform • Lawsenactedfrom 2003 through 2005 • Province divided in 95 sub-regions • Hospital, nursing homes and local community services center mergers (HSSC) • HSSC animating and coordinating local services networks • Goal: accessibility and continuitythroughintegration

  10. ResultsPrimacy in Practice • Widelyapplied but… • Increasedpaperwork (data collection, reports) • Increased size of regionalagencies • Imperfectindicators

  11. Subsidiarity in Practice • HSSC: Real latitude to realizehealth services integrationprojects but… • Ministerial and regionalcommands • Tagged budgets • All in all: increased centralisation

  12. Accountability in Practice • Regulationthrough partial, imperfect « volumetric » indicators • Unintendedeffects • risk of working to reachtargetsinstead of intended goals • risk of gaming and cheating (Freeman, 2002) • Accountabilty more rhetoricthan real

  13. The impact on integrated care • Conflicting messages: • Responsabilitytowards population or ministry? • Integrated care or more outputs? • More coordination makes HSSC look less effective • Integration in spite of the reform? • Earlyinnovators (Demers and Pelchat, forthcoming) • Laggards?

  14. Lessons learned: complexity, subsidiarity and integrated care • IC: complex endeavour (Glouberman and Zimmerman, 2002) • Regulatingtrough central indicatorsisinappropriate • Integration must be encouraged by policies in a way that • send clear and strong signals in favor of integrated care • preserves and strengthens local actors’ capacity and willingness to • innovate • adapt the prescriptions to their context

  15. references • Demers, L., Y. Pelchat (forthcoming in 2013) « Le réseau intégré des services aux aînés en perte d’autonomie des Bois-Francs : une innovation mise à l’épreuve » [Integrated network services for frailelderly in Bois-Francs sub-region. An innovation under pressure], Recherches sociographiques. • Deschênes, J.-C., J. Brunet , T. J. Boudreau, G. Marcoux (1996). Examen des responsabilités respectives du Ministère de la santé et des services sociaux, des régies régionales et des établissements. Réflexions et propositions. [Examination of the respective responsabilities of the ministry of health and social services, regional boards and institutions. Reflexions and propositions].

More Related