IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/pubmmg/v32y2012i2p145-152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Getting to grips with England's formula for local authority support

Author

Listed:
  • Mervyn Stone

Abstract

A Department for Communities and Local Government formula is currently granting over 20 billions of pounds sterling to the 456 local authorities (LAs) of England. This article analyses the remarkable sensitivity of the formula to coordinated changes in the small allocations to Wokingham and Richmond upon Thames (that do not change the total grant)—some big LAs experience large absolute changes in funding while small ones may undergo large percentage changes. This violation of rational principle by a world leader in the development of resource allocation formulae makes a strong case for thoughtful interdisciplinary review of any formula.

Suggested Citation

  • Mervyn Stone, 2012. "Getting to grips with England's formula for local authority support," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 145-152, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:pubmmg:v:32:y:2012:i:2:p:145-152
    DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2012.656022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09540962.2012.656022
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09540962.2012.656022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alex Gibson & Sheena Asthana, 2011. "Resource allocation for English local government: a critique of the four‐block model," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 529-546, July.
    2. Mervyn Stone, 2005. "Accumulating Evidence of Malfunctioning Contractual Government Machinery," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 82-86, April.
    3. Jane Galbraith & Mervyn Stone, 2011. "The abuse of regression in the National Health Service allocation formulae: response to the Department of Health's 2007 ‘resource allocation research paper’," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 517-528, July.
    4. Mervyn Stone & Jane Galbraith, 2006. "How not to fund hospital and community health services in England," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(1), pages 143-164, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Hewson & Joyce Halliday & Alex Gibson & Sheena Asthana, 2016. "Policy analytics need more than a spreadsheet: a case study in funding formulae," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 215-232, January.
    2. Paul Hewson & Joyce Halliday & Alex Gibson & Sheena Asthana, 2016. "Policy analytics need more than a spreadsheet: a case study in funding formulae," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 215-232, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mervyn Stone, 2015. "New development: The remarkable insignificance of NHS England's CCG funding formula," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 311-314, July.
    2. Paul Hewson & Joyce Halliday & Alex Gibson & Sheena Asthana, 2016. "Policy analytics need more than a spreadsheet: a case study in funding formulae," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 215-232, January.
    3. W. W. Cooper & Subhash C. Ray, 2008. "A response to M. Stone: ‘How not to measure the efficiency of public services (and how one might)’," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 171(2), pages 433-448, April.
    4. Paul Hewson & Joyce Halliday & Alex Gibson & Sheena Asthana, 2016. "Policy analytics need more than a spreadsheet: a case study in funding formulae," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 215-232, January.
    5. Rob Ball & David Eiser & David King, 2015. "Assessing Relative Spending Needs of Devolved Government: The Case of Healthcare Spending in the UK," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(2), pages 323-336, February.
    6. Asada, Yukiko & Kephart, George & Hurley, Jeremiah & Yoshida, Yoko & Smith, Andrea & Bornstein, Stephen, 2012. "The role of proximity to death in need-based approaches to health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(3), pages 291-302.
    7. Mervyn Stone & Jane Galbraith, 2006. "How not to fund hospital and community health services in England," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(1), pages 143-164, January.
    8. Vallejo-Torres, Laura & Morris, Stephen & Carr-Hill, Roy & Dixon, Paul & Law, Malcom & Rice, Nigel & Sutton, Matthew, 2009. "Can regional resource shares be based only on prevalence data? An empirical investigation of the proportionality assumption," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 1634-1642, December.
    9. Asthana, Sheena & Gibson, Alex, 2011. "Setting health care capitations through diagnosis-based risk adjustment: A suitable model for the English NHS?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 133-139, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:pubmmg:v:32:y:2012:i:2:p:145-152. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPMM20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.