The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
A bipartisan group of state health policymakers from both the executive and legislative branches who are focused on improving population health.
Networks of state officials, advocates, and others aiming to invest in and transform primary care.
A program dedicated to advancing state-based efforts to make health care more affordable for residents, employers, and states.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
A leadership development program for early and mid-career state government officials who are committed to improving the health of all people in their communities.
A leadership program for senior state government officials who are committed to improving population health.
The Fund focuses on creating an affordable health care system built on strong primary care and partnerships that improve health outcomes for all.
Improving state leaders’ ability to enact and implement evidence-based health policies.
Advancing policies that create a more prevention- and primary care-oriented health system.
Improving population health through policies that contain health care cost growth.
Our state health policy resources offer relevant data analysis and best practices.
The Fund publishes reports, issues briefs, and case studies on state health policy issues.
Short takes on health policy issues from Milbank staff and guest authors.
Insights from Milbank President Debra Lubar on state health policymaking.
Reported articles and Q&As on timely health policy issues, as well as foundation updates.
Milbank Memorial Fund and Milbank Quarterly webinars featuring state health policymakers and researchers.
Updates and expert contact information for reporters.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is a private foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
June 1975 (Volume 53)
Quarterly Article
Emil Berkanovic
Leo G. Reeder
Alfred C. Marcus
Susan Schwartz
September 2026
Sep 25, 2026
Sep 23, 2026
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
The data reported herein are taken from a larger study in which a prepaid medical foundation was compared with a non-prepaid free-for-service system on a number of factors pertaining to how health care is perceived by both Medicaid recipients and physicians. The data to be presented are confined to the issue of the impact of prepayment on Medicaid recipients’ perceptions of their access to health care. Two sets of questions are explored. The first set bears directly on the issue of gaining access to care. The second set addresses the issue of the acceptability of the services received. Few differences were observed between the systems in either accessibility or acceptability. Thus, the fears of some critics of the HMO concept with respect to prepayment creating incentives for the denial of services are not supported by the data. It is concluded that the organizational features of medical practice which affect access are actually quite similar in the two systems.
Author(s): Emil Berkanovic; Leo G. Reeder; Alfred C. Marcus; Susan Schwartz
Read on JSTOR
Volume 53, Issue 2 (pages 241–254) Published in 1975