AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 70, Issue 5 533-542, Copyright © 1980 by American Public Health Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosner, D
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rosner, D
Gaining control: reform, reimbursement and politics in New York's community hospitals, 1890--1915.

D Rosner

This is an historical study of an early twentieth century political struggle regarding hospital reimbursement in New York City. During a period called the "Progressive Era" (1895--1915), administrators in the City's Comptroller's office sought to gain control over small, locally run community hospitals by dismantling the long-standing practice of flat-grant payments to institutions. Central office planners felt that these payments gave too much control to trustees. In its place, the Comptroller initiated a system of per-capita, per-diem reimbursement. Inspectors now judged for the institutions which services and which clients were appropriate for municipal reimbursement. From the perspective of the Comptroller's office, this change was an attempt to put rationality into the system of municipal support for charitable institutions. From the perspective of trustees and community representatives, however, this change was a political attack on the rights of institutions and local communities to control their own fate. Within the context of the larger Progressive Era "good government" movement to centralize decision-making in the hands of experts who believed strongly in the efficiency of larger institutions, it was generally the smallest, most financially troubled community institutions which felt the brunt of these changes.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector QuarterlyHome page
L. M. Salamon
Of Market Failure, Voluntary Failure, and Third-Party Government: Toward a Theory of Government-Nonprofit Relations in the Modern Welfare State
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, January 1, 1987; 16(1-2): 29 - 49.
[Abstract]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1980 by the American Public Health Association