How do we fund Public Health in Australia? How should we?
Alan Shiell, Kate Garvey, Shane Kavanagh, Victoria Loblay, Penelope Hawe
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To map how public health is funded in Australia. To assess whether changes to funding methods might improve system performance. METHODS: Review of publicly accessible documents and discussions with public health key informants. RESULTS: Australia spent $140 per person on public health in 2019-20, (1.8% of total health spending). But there is considerable state and territory variation. This money flows through multiple channels and payment mechanisms. Responsibility for what is funded is largely delegated to authorities close to the problems. This makes it easier to choose the best mechanism for funding an activity. Much information is hidden from view, however. This makes it impossible to assess whether the potential for population benefit is fully realised. CONCLUSIONS: Australia avoids some of the difficulties experienced elsewhere because funding is largely devolved to states in block grants; they shape their own investments. The US, by contrast, prefers categorical funds for specific purposes. Three suggestions for making the funding system here more visible, useful and accountable are canvassed, including 'satellite accounts'. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Funding needs to be more transparent before it is possible to assess whether public health system performance could be improved through changes to the way public health is funded.