Interesting findings from a Reuters review of 255 health-care systems in the United States:
Catholic and other church-owned systems are significantly more likely to provide higher quality performance and efficiency to the communities served than investor-owned systems. . . .
Catholic health systems are also significantly more likely to provide higher quality performance to the communities served than secular not-for-profit health systems, it said. By contrast, investor-owned systems have significantly lower performance than all other groups.
Orthodox. Faithful. Free.
Sign up to get Crisis articles delivered to your inbox daily
The researchers offer one theory as to why:
“The findings of the study suggest a changing role for health system governance and leadership,” said Jean Chenoweth, senior vice president for performance improvement and 100 Top Hospitals programs at Thomson Reuters. “Our data suggest that the leadership of health systems owned by churches may be the most active in aligning quality goals and monitoring achievement of mission across the system.”
It does strike me that church-run organizations may have a clearer mission to begin with, making it easier to focus on implementing it. Any other theories as to why they succeed here where others don’t?
[H/t David Gibson at Commonweal]