Coverage versus generosity: Comparing eligibility and need assessment in six cash‐for‐care programmes

Abstract

This paper investigates the potential trade‐offs between extension of coverage and adequate generosity in cash‐for‐care (CfC) programmes in six European countries (Austria, Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy, and Spain), which are characterised by different configurations of CfC programmes. Building on an empirical analysis of the eligibility rules, of the regulation applied to classify beneficiaries according to their level of dependency, and the ways CfC benefits are distributed among them, it becomes clear that these programmes differ substantially in terms of coverage and generosity. Such differences reflect the variety of ways by which universalism, selectivity, and adequacy are built up together throughout Europe.

Specialist support for persons with disabilities living in the community: Review of international practice

“…Meanwhile, Germany is viewed as providing progressive and comparatively high levels of support, but to a more restricted group of users. Support coverage is also relatively lower in France and Spain, although generosity is considered lower than in Germany (Ranci et al, 2019). While European countries evidently opt for different strategies in support resource allocation, there is also evidence of a gradual convergence of support coverage and generosity between countries over time (Gori and Morciano, 2019).…”

“…However, it has been pointed out that, as demand for social protection begins to exceed budgetary limitations, governments face an inevitable trade-off between the coverage and the generosity of the support system. Where support is considered a universal right unconditional on income, age, contributions made or other eligibility criteria, the coverage and generosity of supports are instead determined by the definition of a need for support, which can deviate considerably between countries (Ranci et al, 2019).…”

“…Different countries opt for different strategies to deal with this trade-off between coverage and generosity. Ranci et al (2019) compare the strategies of several European countries in the overall area of long-term care, which encompasses support for older persons as well as for persons with disabilities. Austria is found to be one of the most generous countries in terms of total expenditure on long-term support, with relatively broad coverage of support.…”

“…In other words, much higher levels of support are provided to users with higher levels of need in Austria. Support is not considered progressive in Italy or the UK, where all users receive a relatively generous basic level of support but users with the highest level of need receive insufficient support (Ranci et al, 2019). Indeed, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities notes evidence that personal budgets in the UK 'do not necessarily allow persons with disabilities to have access and control over social care services' (UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2017a).…”

Understanding Resource Allocation Processes in Social Care for Frail Older People: Lessons from a National Survey

“…There was marked variation, which may have been explained in part by rurality and scale of central government funding to local authorities as well as the vagaries of the resource allocation system itself. At the micro-level, researchers have examined resource allocation in cash for care payments to individuals across several jurisdictions, including England (Gori & Morciano 2019;Ranci et al, 2019). However, the care payments in England analysed in the study were only Central Government Social Security benefits such as Attendance Allowance, Personal Independence Payments, and Disability Living Allowance.…”