The Impact of Converting Categorical into Block Grants: The Lessons from the 314(d) Block Grant in the Partnership for Health Act

Section 314(d) of P. L. 89–749, (1966), the Partnershipfor Health Act, combined nine categorical health grants intoone block grant for health. The impact of section 314(d), according to data gathered forthis study, can be summarized as follows: the block grant increasedthe administrative flexibility of state health officials; statehealth planning agencies generally did not have a major influenceon the block grant; state health planning agencies located ingovernors' offices had less influence over the block grant thanthose located in state health departments; Congress did notsignificantly increase expenditures for the block grant; nationalinfluence was increased by creating health programs that couldpotentially have been made part of the block grant; and theblock grant did not generally result in a reordering of spendingpriorities. The best explanation for the unspectacular effect of combiningseveral categorical grants into one block grant was that, withoutnew resources, the substantial (and welcome) new administrativeflexibility given state officials was insufficient to producean important substantive reordering of program priorities.     

Governance and Regulation of the Peruvian University System: Overcoming Reform Resistance through Quality Assurance Policies

This article examines the new governance of the Peruvian university system, which evolved in response to market liberalisation and weak quality assurance mechanisms. New actors and commercial interests emerged, building their network of relationships within the political arena. With the passing of a new Universities Law in 2014, ambitious reforms were set in motion, designed to reverse the decline in the quality of higher education. This study examines these reforms, focusing on whether and how they are changing the governance and structure of the system. It also identifies some conceptual and design flaws, such as the weaknesses of the main steering body and the accreditation regime, as well as limitations on the independence of the regulatory agency.