Does the public sector outperform the nonprofit and for‐profit sectors? Evidence from a national panel study on nursing home quality and access

Are public and private organizations fundamentally different? This question has been among the most enduring inquiries in public administration. Our study explores the impact of organizational ownership on two complementary aspects of performance: service quality and access to services for impoverished clients. Derived from public management research on performance determinants and nursing home care literature, our hypotheses stipulate that public, nonprofit, and forprofit nursing homes use different approaches to balance the strategic tradeoff between two aspects of performance. Panel data on 14,423 facilities were analyzed to compare measures of quality and access across three sectors using different estimation methods. Findings indicate that ownership status is associated with critical differences in both quality and access. Public and nonprofit organizations are similar in terms of quality, and both perform significantly better than their forprofit counterparts. When compared to nonprofit and, in some cases, for‐profit facilities, public nursing homes have a significantly higher share of Medicaid recipients. The paper proposes strategies to address the identified long‐term care divide. © 2008 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

De-Mediatizing the Media Case: Elements of a Critical Approach

The Judgment of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwandain the Media case focuses on the responsibility of three individualscharged on the basis of their control of a radio channel anda newspaper in Rwanda. Due to overt freedom of speech issuesrelating to this Judgment, it was immediately mass-mediatized.This article analyses the case from a purely legal perspective,focusing on the issue of ‘how’ the Judges determinedthe culpability of individuals for crimes concerning the media'sinfluence in the preparation and execution of mass crimes. Somecritical elements appear in this perspective, including: the(il)legitimacy of the extension of jurisdiction ratione temporis;the (in)opportunity to establish the mens rea of an inchoateoffence via the actus reus of a non-inchoate offence; the (un)certaindistinction between forms of direct and indirect participation;and the (in)determination of the criteria applied to reducethe sentence against one of the accused (as a form of reparationfor the violation of procedure by the Prosecutor).     

Study of the brainstem, particularly the arcuate nucleus, in sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and sudden intrauterine unexplained death (SIUD)

Complete examination of the brainstem involves transverse serial 5-microm sections made throughout the entire brainstem. The number of serial sections varies from 360 in sudden intrauterine unexplained death (SIUD) to 600 in term fetuses to over 1400 sections in sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) victims. The procedure is not applicable in all histopathological laboratories, owing to the need for additional technical personnel. The simplified procedure allows a remarkable reduction of the number of sections. The brainstem is divided into 3 blocks. The first, cranial block, extends from the border between the medulla oblongata and pons up to the upper pole of the olivary nucleus. The second, intermediate block, corresponding to the submedian area of the inferior olivary nucleus, has as reference point the obex and extends 2 to 3 mm above and below the obex itself. The third, caudal block, includes the lower pole of the inferior olivary nucleus and the lower adjacent area of the medulla oblongata. Examinations of the brainstems from 106 SIDS victims, 30 controls, and 51 stillborns underlined a remarkable variability, particularly of the arcuate nucleus. The simplified examination of the brainstem makes it possible to evaluate the structures, examining 3 specific levels, defined by morphologic reference points.