The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
March 2018 (Volume 96)
Quarterly Article
Sanjay K. Mohanty
Rockli Kim
Pijush Kanti Khan
S.V. Subramanian
Nov 5, 2024
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Policy Points:
Context: In India, health care is a local good, and households are the major source of financing it. Earlier studies have examined diverse determinants of health care spending, but no attempt has been made to understand the geographical variation in household and catastrophic health spending. We used multilevel modeling to assess the relative importance of villages, districts, and states to health spending in India.
Methods: We used data on the health expenditures of 101,576 households collected in the consumption expenditure schedule (68th round) carried out by the National Sample Survey in 2011-2012. We examined 4 dependent variables: per-capita health spending (PHS), per-capita institutional health spending (PIHS), per-capita noninstitutional health spending (PNHS), and catastrophic health spending (CHS). CHS was defined as household health spending exceeding 40% of its capacity to pay. We used multilevel linear regression and logistic models to decompose the variation in each outcome by state, region, district, village, and household levels.
Findings: The average PHS was 1,331 Indian rupees (INR), which varied by state-level economic development. About one-fourth of Indian households incurred CHS, which was equally high in both the economically developed and poorer states. After controlling for household level factors, 77.1% of the total variation in PHS was attributable to households, 10.1% to states, 9.5% to villages, 2.6% to districts, and 0.7% to regions. The pattern in variance partitioning was similar for PNHS. The largest interstate variation was found for CHS (15.9%), while the opposite was true for PIHS (3.2%).
Conclusions: We observed substantial variations in household health spending at the state and village levels compared with India’s districts and regions. The large variation in CHS attributable to states indicates interstate inequality in the accessibility to and cost of health care. Our findings suggest that contextual factors at the macro and micro political units are important to reduce India’s household health spending and CHS.
Keywords: household health spending, catastrophic health spending, geographic variation, multilevel modeling, India.
Read on Wiley Online Library
Volume 96, Issue 1 (pages 167-206) DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12315 Published in 2018
