Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T18:01:35.257Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Equity and Efficiency in the Allocation of the Personal Social Services*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2009

A. C. Bebbington  and
Bleddyn Davies
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper investigates two issues of equity in the receipt of the home help service, one about territorial justice, the other about sex discrimination. It uses GHS data for 1980. An argument is developed about the efficiency with which services are targeted on persons who by normative criteria would appear to have most need of them. Efficiency is of two types: horizontal efficiency, the proportion of persons judged in need who receive services; and vertical efficiency, the proportion of services allocated to persons judged in need. The findings are that there is evidence of inequity both between different areas and between the sexes. Metropolitan areas are advantaged compared with rural areas, and this cannot be explained by differences in social support nor by the availability of other domiciliary services. Among the elderly living alone, neither sex is advantaged, but in elderly married couple households the home help service is more frequently provided in the case of a husband caring for a disabled wife than in the case of a wife caring for a disabled husband.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , July 1983 , pp. 309 - 329
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barlow, A. and Matthews, D. (1978), Need for and receipt of domiciliary social services amongst the elderly, DHSS Statistics and Research Division 6, London.Google Scholar
Bebbington, A. C. (1979), ‘Changes in the provision of social services to the elderly in the community’, Social Policy and Administration, 13:2 (04), 111–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bebbington, A. C. and Davies, B. P. (1980), ‘Territorial Need Indicators: A new approach, part II’, Journal of Social Policy, 9:4 (10), 433–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bebbington, A. C. and Davies, B. P. (1982), ‘Patterns of social service provision’, in Warnes, A. M. (ed.), Geographical perspectives on the elderly, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Bebbington, A. C. and Tong, M. S. (1983), ‘A preliminary report of a national survey of Old People' Homes’, Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent at Canterbury.Google Scholar
Black Report (1980), Inequalities in Health, London.Google Scholar
Challis, D. and Davies, B. P. (1981), The Thanet Community Care Project, Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent at Canterbury.Google Scholar
Collins, E. and Klein, R. (1980), ‘Equity and the NHS: Self-reported morbidity, access and primary care’, British Medical Journal, 181 (6248), 1111–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway, D. A. and Roberts, H. V. (1983), ‘Reverse regression, fairness, and employment discrimination’, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 1:1, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, B. P. and Coles, O. (1981), ‘Electoral support, bureaucratic criteria, cost variations and intra-authority allocations’, Political Studies, 29:3, 515–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, B. P. with M. Reddin (1978), Universality, Selectivity and Effectiveness in Social Policy, Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
Department of the Environment (DOE) (1980), Grant Related Expenditure, How the Expenditure Needs of Local Authorities are Assessed in the new Block Grant, DOE, London.Google Scholar
Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) (1982), Caring for the Elderly and Handicapped: Community Care Policies and Women's Lives, EOC, Manchester.Google Scholar
Ferlie, E. (1982), Sourcebook of Innovations in the Community Care of the Elderly, Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent at Canterbury.Google Scholar
Foster, D. P. (1976), ‘Social class differences in sickness and general practitioner consultations’, Health Trends, 8:2, 29–32.Google Scholar
Fuller, M. and Bebbington, A. C. (1983), ‘Likelihood ratio tests for ratios in contingency tests’ (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Goldberg, M. and Connelly, N. (1982), The Effectiveness of Social Care for the Elderly, Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
Gorbach, P. and Sinclair, I. (1981), Pressure on health and social services for the elderly, unpublished report, National Institute of Social Work.Google Scholar
Gwynne, W. D. and Fean, L. (1978), The Home Help Service in Cumbria, Cumbria Social Services Department, Carlisle.Google Scholar
Harbert, W. H. (1976), Home Help Assessments, An Examination of Ideal and Actual Allocations, Avon County Council Social Services Department, Bristol.Google Scholar
Harris, A. (1968), Social Welfare for the Elderly, HMSO (for Government Social Survey), London.Google Scholar
Harris, A. (1971), Handicapped and Impaired, HMSO (for Government Social Survey), London.Google Scholar
Howell, N., Boldy, D. and Smith, B. (1979), Allocating the Home Help Services, Bedford Square Press, London.Google Scholar
Hunt, A. (1970), The Home Help Service in England and Wales. HMSO (for Government Social Survey), London.Google Scholar
Hurley, B. and Wolstenholme, L. (1979), The Home Help Study, City of Bradford Directorate of Social Services, Bradford.Google Scholar
Jenkins, M. (1979), The Home Help Study, Report 3, Mid-Glamorgan Social Services Department, Cardiff.Google Scholar
Judge, K., Ferlie, E. and Smith, J. (1982), Home Help Charges, Policy Studies Institute, London.Google Scholar
Le, J. Grand (1978), ‘Who benefits from public expenditure?’ New Society, 45:833, 614–16.Google Scholar
Le Grand, J. (1982), The Strategy of Equality: Redistribution and the Social Services, George Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar
May, J. S. (1977), Equal Help for Equal Need? Warwickshire County Council Social Services Department, Warwick.Google Scholar
Nissel, M. and Bonnerjea, L. (1982), Family care of the handicaped elderly: who pays?, Report no. 602, Policy Studies Institute, London.Google Scholar
Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (1982), General Household Survey 1980, HMSO, London.Google Scholar
Pritlove, J. H. (1976), Study of Home Help Clients, City of Bradford Directorate of Social Services, Bradford.Google Scholar
Resource Allocation Working Party, DHSS (1976), Sharing Resources for Health in England, HMSO, London.Google Scholar
Snow, T. (1981), Services for old age; a growing crisis in London, Age Concern, London.Google Scholar
Townsend, J. (1981), ‘The Home Help Service in Cheshire’, Clearing House for Local Authority Social Services Research, (1), University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
Townsend, P. and Wedderburn, D. (1965), The Aged in the Welfare State, G. Bell & Sons, London.Google Scholar
Weisbrod, B. A. (1972), Collective action and the distribution of income, Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
West, P. A. (1981), ‘Theoretical and Practical Equity in the National Health Service in England’, Social Science and Medicine, 15c, 117–22.Google ScholarPubMed