The Milbank Memorial Fund is an endowed operating foundation that publishes The Milbank Quarterly, commissions projects, and convenes state health policy decision makers on issues they identify as important to population health.
We focus on a number of topic areas identified by state health policy leaders as important to population health.
The Center for Evidence-based Policy at Oregon Health & Science University is a national leader in evidence-based decision making and policy design.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. Get the latest from thought leaders, including Christopher F. Koller, president of the Fund.
We publish The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to population health.
June 2015 (Volume 93)
June 2015 | Pamela Doty, Pamela Nadash, Nathalie Racco | Original Investigation
Context: An aging population leads to a growing demand for long-term services and supports (LTSS). In 2002, France introduced universal, income-adjusted, public long-term care coverage for adults 60 and older, whereas the United States funds means-tested benefits only. Both countries have private long-term care insurance (LTCI) markets: American policies create alternatives to outof-pocket spending and protect purchasers from relying on Medicaid. Sales, however, have stagnated, and the market’s viability is uncertain. In France, private LTCI supplements public coverage, and sales are growing, although its potential to alleviate the long-term care financing problem is unclear. We explore whether France’s very different approach to structuring public and private financing for long-term care could inform the United States’ long-term care financing reform efforts.
Methods: We consulted insurance experts and conducted a detailed review of public reports, academic studies, and other documents to understand the public and private LTCI systems in France, their advantages and disadvantages, and the factors affecting their development.
Findings: France provides universal public coverage for paid assistance with functional dependency for people 60 and older. Benefits are steeply income adjusted and amounts are low. Nevertheless, expenditures have exceeded projections, burdening local governments. Private supplemental insurance covers 11% of French, mostly middle-income adults (versus 3% of Americans 18 and older). Whether policyholders will maintain employer-sponsored coverage after retirement is not known. The government’s interest in pursuing an explicit public/private partnership has waned under President Franc¸ois Hollande, a centrist socialist, in contrast to the previous center-right leader, President Nicolas Sarkozy, thereby reducing the prospects of a coordinated public/private strategy.
Conclusions: American private insurers are showing increasing interest in long-term care financing approaches that combine public and private elements. The French example shows how a simple, cheap, cash-based product can gain traction among middle-income individuals when offered by employers and combined with a steeply income-adjusted universal public program. The adequacy of such coverage, however, is a concern.
Author(s): Pamela Doty, Pamela Nadash, and Nathalie Racco
Keywords: long-term care, aging, insurance, comparative study, social welfare
Read on Wiley Online Library
Volume 93, Issue 2 (pages 359–391)
Published in 2015
Advocacy for Health Equity: A Synthesis Review
Tobacco-Control Policies in Tobacco-Growing States: Where Tobacco Was King