Using Prevention Research to Reduce Racial Disparities in Health Through Innovative Funding Strategies: The Case of Doula Care.

Racial disparities in maternal birth outcomes are substantial even when comparing women with similar levels of education. While racial differences in maternal death at birth or shortly afterward have attracted significant attention from researchers, non-fatal but potentially life-threatening pregnancy complications are 30-40 times more common than maternal deaths. Black women have the worst maternal health outcomes. Only recently have health researchers started to view structural racism rather than race as the critical factor underlying these persistent inequities. We discuss the economic framework that prevention scientists can use to convince policymakers to make sustainable investments in maternal health by expanding funding for doula care. While a few states allow Medicaid to fund doula services, most women at risk of poor maternal health outcomes arising from structural racism lack access to culturally sensitive caregivers during the pre-and post-partum periods as well as during birth. We provide a guide to how research in health services can be more readily translated to policy recommendations by describing two innovative ways that cost-benefit analysis can help direct private and public funding to support doula care for Black women and others at risk of poor birth outcomes.

Seeking outcomes under tight budgets: A case for health impact bonds in Post-COVID times.

With global public debt at record levels, governments are facing unprecedented challenges in providing essential health services. This exploratory study aims to assess the relevance of Health Impact Bonds (HIBs) as a means of financing preventative health services during times of fiscal constraint and in the aftermath of the COVID pandemic. The study draws on a review of the literature on HIBs, along with a case study analysis of HIBs implemented in the UK. The findings of the study indicate that, although HIBs offer promise as an innovative funding tool for preventative health services in tight fiscal situations, certain challenges are limiting their broader adoption.

"Let's Not Have the Perfect Be the Enemy of the Good": Social Impact Bonds, Randomized Controlled Trials, and the Valuation of Social Programs.

This article uses the case of "social impact bonds" (SIBs) to explore the role of social science methods in new markets in "social investment." Pioneered in the UK in 2010, SIBs use private capital to fund social programs with governments paying returns for successful outcomes. Central to the SIB model is the question of evaluation and the method to be used in determining program outcomes and investor returns. In the United States, the randomized controlled trial (RCT) has been the dominant method. However, this has not been without controversy. Some SIB practitioners and investors have argued that, while this may be the perfect tool, the need to grow the SIB market demands a more pragmatic approach. Drawing from a three-year study of SIBs, and informed by Science and Technology Studies (STS)-inspired work on valuation and the social life of methods, the article explores RCTs as both a valuation technology central to SIB design and the object of a micropolitics of valuation which has impeded market growth. It is the relationship between, and the politics of, evaluation and valuation that is a key lesson of the SIB experiment and an important insight for future research on "social investment" and other settings where methods are constitutive of financial value.

Evidence-Based Analysis of Social Impact Bonds for Homelessness: A Scoping Review.

Social impact bonds (SIBs) have emerged as an innovative financial instrument designed to support the social service sector in delivering innovative social programs. In particular, SIBs can be used to finance prevention of homelessness among those regarded as vulnerable. There is little evidence that outcomes from SIB-funded programs are significantly different compared to more traditional programs. This is the first scoping review of academic and gray literature that explores the main features and outcomes from all SIBs for homelessness based on evidence, addressing an important gap in the literature. The scoping review provides a transparent and comprehensive approach for mapping areas of this research. A total of 73 studies and articles were found eligible for inclusion. These concerned 32 SIBs for homelessness implemented in the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, and Belgium. The review found that academic papers on SIBs for homelessness lack evidence-based analysis, while gray literature lacks transparency, especially in evaluation method and outcome. We found that fourteen projects met their target outcomes. The common features of these SIBs were a navigator intervention model, effective partnership working, and use of Special Purpose Vehicles. Our findings show that it is necessary for the managers of SIBs to improve outcome metrics and evaluation methods, support target groups fairly, and attract more private investors to finance SIBs for better addressing homelessness.

Títulos de impacto social como política pública: panorama internacional e contribuições para a implementação no Brasil / Títulos de impacto social como política pública: panorama internacional y contribuciones para la implementación en Brasil / Social impact bonds as public policy: international panorama and contributions to implementation in Brazil

Resumo Apesar de lançado em 2011, o título de impacto social (SIB, na sigla em inglês social impact bonds) é um instrumento ainda em desenvolvimento e que encontra inúmeros desafios. Este artigo tem como objetivo apresentar características dos SIBs e desafios relativos à sua implementação como mecanismo para financiamento de projetos públicos com propósito social. Após revisão bibliográfica e documental, foram identificadas e apresentadas as principais críticas ao modelo. Três casos internacionais de SIBs que já encerraram seus ciclos de maturidade foram selecionados para a análise de aspectos éticos e metodológicos, de métricas, de resultados e de atores. Implicações para projetos no Brasil foram consideradas com base nas análises dos casos internacionais.

Resumen A pesar de haber sido lanzado en 2011, el contrato de impacto social (SIB, acrónimo del término inglés social impact bond) es un instrumento inmaduro que enfrenta numerosos desafíos. Este artículo tiene como objetivo presentar las características de los SIB y los desafíos relativos a su implementación como mecanismos para financiar proyectos públicos con propósito social. Después de la revisión bibliográfica y documental, se identificaron y presentaron las principales críticas al modelo. Se seleccionaron tres casos internacionales de SIB que ya completaron sus ciclos de madurez para el análisis de aspectos éticos, metodológicos, de métricas de resultados y de actores. Las implicaciones para proyectos en Brasil se consideraron a partir del análisis de estos casos internacionales.

Abstract Despite being launched in 2011, the social impact bond (SIB) is an instrument under development that faces numerous challenges. This article presents the characteristics of SIBs and challenges related to their implementation as mechanisms to finance public projects with a social purpose. After a bibliographical and documentary review, three international cases of SIBs that have completed their maturity cycles, relevant for critical analysis of possible projects in Brazil, were selected. Ethical, methodological, metrics, results, and actor networks are analyzed in the three SIBs. Implications for projects in Brazil were considered from the analysis of these international cases.

Exploring new uses for existing drugs: innovative mechanisms to fund independent clinical research.

BACKGROUND: Finding new therapeutic uses for existing medicines could lead to safe, affordable and timely new treatment options for patients with high medical needs. However, due to a lack of economic incentives, pharmaceutical developers are rarely interested to invest in research with approved medicines, especially when they are out of basic patent or regulatory protection. Consequently, potential new uses for these medicines are mainly studied in independent clinical trials initiated and led by researchers from academia, research institutes, or collaborative groups. Yet, additional financial support is needed to conduct expensive phase III clinical trials to confirm the results from exploratory research. METHODS: In this study, scientific and grey literature was searched to identify and evaluate new mechanisms for funding clinical trials with repurposed medicines. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 European stakeholders with expertise in clinical research, funding mechanisms and/or drug repurposing between November 2018 and February 2019 to consider the future perspectives of applying new funding mechanisms. RESULTS: Traditional grant funding awarded by government and philanthropic organisations or companies is well known and widely implemented in all research fields. In contrast, only little research has focused on the application potential of newer mechanisms to fund independent clinical research, such as social impact bonds, crowdfunding or public-private partnerships. Interviewees stated that there is a substantial need for additional financial support in health research, especially in areas where there is limited commercial interest. However, the implementation of new funding mechanisms is facing several practical and financial challenges, such as a lack of expertise and guidelines, high transaction costs and difficulties to measure health outcomes. Furthermore, interviewees highlighted the need for increased collaboration and centralisation at a European and international level to make clinical research more efficient and reduce the need for additional funding. CONCLUSIONS: New funding mechanisms to support clinical research may become more important in the future but the unresolved issues identified in the current study warrant further exploration.

Financing The Infrastructure Of Accountable Communities For Health Is Key To Long-Term Sustainability.

Accountable Communities for Health (ACHs) are collaborative partnerships spanning health, public health, and social services that seek to improve the health of individuals and communities by addressing social determinants of health such as housing, food security, employment, and transportation. ACHs require funding not only for programs and services but also for core infrastructure functions. We conducted a legal and policy review to identify potential funding streams specifically for ACH infrastructure activities. We found multiple and credible options at the federal and state levels and in the public health, health insurance, and philanthropic and private sectors. Such options could support ACH infrastructure directly or through reimbursement for administrative costs associated with programmatic work. Yet we also found that there is no dedicated or explicit source of funding for these critical functions. For sustainable and long-term ACH support, policy makers and program administrators should clarify and define ACH infrastructure functions and, where appropriate, explicitly recognize supporting these functions as an allowable use of funds and facilitate their coordination across program funding streams.

The Potential of Pay-for-Success as a Financing Strategy for Evidence-Based Practices: An Illustration with Multisystemic Therapy.

There is a critical need to identify strategies for financing the implementation of evidence-based practices. We illustrate the potential of pay-for-success financing (PFS)-a strategy in which private investors fund implementation and receive a return on investment from a government payer-using multisystemic therapy as an example. We argue that standard multisystemic therapy (for serious juvenile offenders) and several of its adaptations (for other complex behavioral problems in youth) would be good candidates for PFS in the right contexts. Despite some challenges for policymakers and administrators, PFS has significant potential as a financing strategy for evidence-based practices.

"Pay for Success" Financing and Home-Based Multicomponent Childhood Asthma Interventions: Modeling Results From the Detroit Medicaid Population.

Policy Points: The Pay for Success (PFS) financing approach has potential for scaling the implementation of evidence-based prevention interventions in Medicaid populations, including a range of multicomponent interventions for childhood asthma that combine home environment risk mitigation with medical case management. Even though this type of intervention is efficacious and cost-saving among high-risk children with asthma, the main challenges for implementation in a PFS context include legal and regulatory barriers to capturing federal Medicaid savings and using them as a source of private investor repayment. Federal-level policy change and guidance are needed to support PFS financing of evidence-based interventions that would reduce expensive acute care among Medicaid enrollees. CONTEXT: Pay for Success has emerged as a potential financing mechanism for innovative and cost-effective prevention programs. In the PFS model, interventions that provide value to the public sector are implemented with financing from private investors who receive a payout from the government only if the metrics identified in a performance-based contract are met. In this nascent field, little has been written about the potential for and challenges of PFS initiatives that produce savings and/or value for Medicaid. METHODS: In order to elucidate the basic economics of a PFS intervention in a Medicaid population, we modeled the potential impact of an evidence-based multicomponent childhood asthma intervention among low-income children enrolled in Medicaid in Detroit. We modeled outcomes and a comparative benefit-cost analysis in 3 risk-based target groups: (1) all children with an asthma diagnosis; (2) children with an asthma-related emergency department visit in the past year; and (3) children with an asthma-related hospitalization in the past year. Modeling scenarios for each group produced estimates of potential state and federal Medicaid savings for different types or levels of investment, the time frames for savings, and some overarching challenges. FINDINGS: The PFS economics of a home-based asthma intervention are most viable if it targets children who have already experienced an expensive episode of asthma-related care. In a 7-year demonstration, the overall (undiscounted) modeled potential savings for Group 2 were $1.4 million for the federal Medicaid and $634,000 for the state Medicaid programs, respectively. Targeting children with at least 1 hospitalization in the past year (Group 3) produced estimated potential savings of $2.8 million to federal Medicaid and $1.3 million to state Medicaid. However, current Medicaid rules and regulations pose significant challenges for capturing federal Medicaid savings for PFS payouts. CONCLUSIONS: A multicomponent intervention that provides home remediation and medical case management to high-risk children with asthma has significant potential for PFS financing in urban Medicaid populations. However, there are significant administrative and payment challenges, including the limited ability to capture federal Medicaid savings and to use them as a source of investor repayment. Without some policy reform and clear guidance from the federal government, the financing burden of PFS outcome payments will be on the state Medicaid program or some other state-level funding source.

Pay For Success And Population Health: Early Results From Eleven Projects Reveal Challenges And Promise.

Pay for success (PFS) is a type of social impact investing that uses private capital to finance proven prevention programs that help a government reduce public expenditures or achieve greater value. We conducted an analysis of the first eleven PFS projects in the United States to investigate the potential of PFS as a strategy for financing and disseminating interventions aimed at improving population health and health equity. The PFS approach has significant potential for bringing private-sector resources to interventions regarding social determinants of health. Nonetheless, a number of challenges remain, including structuring PFS initiatives so that optimal prevention benefits can be achieved and ensuring that PFS interventions and evaluation designs are based on rigorous research principles. In addition, increased policy attention regarding key PFS payout issues is needed, including the "wrong pockets" problem and legal barriers to using federal Medicaid funds as an investor payout source.

The application of social impact bonds to universal health-care initiatives in South-East Asia

Social impact bonds (SIBs) have the potential to improve the efficiency ofgovernment health-care spending in South-East Asia. In a SIB, governmentssign a pay-for-performance contract with one or several providers of health-careservices, and the providers borrow up-front capital from investors. Governmentsoutside South-East Asia have started to experiment with SIBs in criminal justice,homelessness and health care. Governments of South-East Asia can advancethe goal of universal health care by using SIBs to improve the efficiency of healthcare service providers and by motivating providers to expand coverage. Thispaper describes SIBs and their potential application to health-care initiatives inthe Region