scholarly journals Population Intermediate Outcomes of Diabetes Under Pay-for-Performance Incentives in England From 2004 to 2008

Diabetes Care ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 427-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Vaghela ◽  
M. Ashworth ◽  
P. Schofield ◽  
M. C. Gulliford
Keyword(s):  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Performance Incentives ◽  
Intermediate Outcomes

Cost-Effectiveness of Hospital Pay-for-Performance Incentives

2006 ◽  
Vol 63 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 49S-72S ◽  
Author(s):  
Tammie A. Nahra ◽  
Kristin L. Reiter ◽  
Richard A. Hirth ◽  
Janet E. Shermer ◽  
John R. C. Wheeler
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Performance Incentives

scholarly journals Perverse Incentives with Pay for Performance: Cover Crops in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

2013 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 491-507
Author(s):  
Darrell J. Bosch ◽  
James W. Pease ◽  
Robert Wieland ◽  
Doug Parker
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Nitrogen And Phosphorus ◽  
Performance Incentives ◽  
Chesapeake Bay Watershed ◽  
Incentive Programs ◽  
Run Off ◽  
Perverse Incentives ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Cost

Policymakers are concerned about nitrogen and phosphorus export to water bodies. Exports may be reduced by paying farmers to adopt practices to reduce runoff or by paying performance incentives tied to estimated run-off reductions. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of practice and performance incentives for reducing nitrogen exports. Performance incentives potentially improve farm-level and allocative efficiencies relative to practice incentives. However, the efficiency improvements can be undermined by baseline shifts when growers adopt crops that enhance the performance payments but cause more pollution. Policymakers must carefully specify rules for performance-incentive programs and payments to avoid such baseline shifting.

scholarly journals Do pay-for-performance incentives lead to a better health outcome?

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (6) ◽  
pp. 2167-2184
Author(s):  
Alina Peluso ◽  
Paolo Berta ◽  
Veronica Vinciotti
Keyword(s):  
Health Outcome ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Performance Incentives

scholarly journals Quality-Based Payment for Medical Groups and Individual Physicians

2009 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
James C. Robinson ◽  
Stephen M. Shortell ◽  
Diane R. Rittenhouse ◽  
Sara Fernandes-Taylor ◽  
Robin R. Gillies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Performance Incentives ◽  
Payment Incentives ◽  
Medical Groups ◽  
Bonus Payments ◽  
Service Basis

This paper measures the extent to which medical groups experience external pay-for-performance incentives based on quality and patient satisfaction and the extent to which these groups pay their primary care and specialist physicians using similar criteria. Over half (52%) of large medical groups received bonus payments from health insurance plans in the period 2006–2007 based on measures of quality and patient satisfaction. Medical groups facing external pay-for-performance incentives are more likely to pay their primary care physicians (odds ratio [OR] 4.5; p<.001) and specialists (OR 2.5; p=.07) based on quality and satisfaction. Groups facing capitation payment incentives to control costs are more likely to pay member physicians on salary and less likely to pay based on productivity (p<.001 for primary care; p<.05 for specialists) than groups paid by insurers on a fee-for-service basis.

scholarly journals Quality Improvement With Pay-for-Performance Incentives in Integrated Behavioral Health Care

2012 ◽  
Vol 102 (6) ◽  
pp. e41-e45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Unützer ◽  
Ya-Fen Chan ◽  
Erin Hafer ◽  
Jessica Knaster ◽  
Anne Shields ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Behavioral Health ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Behavioral Health Care ◽  
Performance Incentives ◽  
Integrated Behavioral Health

Culture, Competencies and Compensation: A Framework for Pay for Performance Incentives

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-48
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Customer Orientation ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Performance Incentives ◽  
Pay Systems ◽  
Performance Orientation ◽  
Market Culture ◽  
Clan Culture ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Employee Competencies

The extant literature on pay for performance (PFP) compensation either focuses on factors dealing with the implementation of those programs, or the viability of PFP as a universal ‘best practice’. Alternatively we suggest that different organizational culture types align with unique firm competencies, and are supported by specific pay systems. We contend that a ‘clan’ culture might best foster the employee competencies of adaptability, innovation and technical expertise, and best be supported by a skill-based pay (SBP) compensation system. Alternatively, a ‘market’ culture might best foster the competencies of customer orientation and performance orientation, and be best supported by PFP.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document