Determinants of Nursing Homes Performance: The Case of Portuguese Santas Casas da Misericórdia

  • André S. VelosoEmail author
  • Clara Bento Vaz
  • Jorge Alves
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics book series (PROMS, volume 223)


This study aims to evaluate the economic efficiency of Nursing Homes owned by 96 Santas Casas da Misericórdia (SCM) and the determinants that influenced their efficiency in 2012 and 2013. The SCM are the oldest non-profit entities, which belong to Third Sector in Portugal, provide this social response and receive significant financial contributions annually from the state. The study is developed in two stages. In the first stage, the efficiency scores were calculated through the non-parametric DEA technique. In the second stage, Tobit regression is used to verify the effect of certain organizational variables on efficiency, namely the number of users and existence of Nursing Home chains. The results of the DEA model show that the efficiency average is 81.9%, and only 10 out of 96 Nursing Homes are efficient. Tobit regression shows that the number of users has a positive effect on the efficiency of Nursing Homes, whereas the existence of Nursing Home chains affects their efficiency negatively.


Data envelopment analysis Efficiency Nursing homes Third sector 



This work is financed by the ERDF − European Regional Development Fund through the Operational Programme for Competitiveness and Internationalisation - COMPETE 2020 Programme within project “POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006961”, and by National Funds through the Portuguese funding agency, FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia as part of project “UID/EEA/50014/2013”.


  1. 1.
    R. Anderson, D. Lewis, J. Webb, The Efficiency of nursing home chains and the implications of non-profit status. J. Real Estate Portf. Manag. 5(3), 235–245 (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Anderson, H. Weeks, B. Hobbs, J. Webb, Nursing home quality, chain affiliation, profit status and performance. J. Real Estate Res. 25(1), 43–60 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. Arling, R. Nordquist, J. Capitman, Nursing home cost and ownership type: evidence of interaction effects. Health Serv. Res. 22, 255–269 (1987)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Banaszak-Holl, W. Berta, D. Bowman, C. Joel, B. Mitchell, The rise of human service chains: antecedents to acquisitions and their effects on the quality of care in US nursing Homes. Manag. Decis. Econ. 23(4), 261–282 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Banker, A. Charnes, W. Cooper, Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag. Sci. 30(9), 1078–1092 (1984)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Bazzoli, B. Chan, The financial performance of hospitals belonging to health networks and systems. Inquiry 37(3), 234–252 (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Ben-Ner, T. Ren, Does Organization Ownership Matter? Structure and Performance in For-Profit, Non-profit and Local Government Nursing Homes, in Annual Conference Industry Studies (Boston MA, USA, 2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Charnes, W. Cooper, E. Rhodes, Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Op. Res. 2(6), 429–444 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Coelli, D. Rao, C. O’Donnell, G. Battese, An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis (Springer Science Business Media, New York, 2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    N. DeLellis. Determinants of Nursing Home Performance: Examining the Relationship Between Quality and Efficiency. Ph.D. thesis, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    DGSS, Circular de Orientação Normativa. Technical Report 3, Direção Geral da Segurança Social (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eurostat, Old Age Dependency Ratio. Technical report (2017),
  13. 13.
    Eurostat, Projected Old Age Dependency Ratio. Technical report (2017b),
  14. 14.
    J. Fizel, T. Nunnikhoven, The efficiency of nursing home chains. Appl. Econ. 25, 49–55 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. Garavaglia, E. Lettieri, T. Agasisti, S. Lopez, Efficiency and quality of care in nursing homes: an italian case study. Health Care Manag. Sci. 14, 22–35 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    GEP-MSESS, Carta Social - Rede de Serviços e Equipamentos. Technical report, Gabinete de Estratégia e Planeamento do Ministério de Solidariedade (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    GEP-MSESS, Rede de Serviços e Equipamentos. Technical report, Gabinete de Estratégia e Planeamento do Ministério de Solidariedade (2016),
  18. 18.
    B. Hollingsworth, Non-parametric and parametric applications measuring efficiency in health care. Health Care Manag. Sci. 6, 203–218 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Instituto da Segurança Social, IP. Guia Prático - Orçamento e Contas de Instituições Particulares de Solidariedade Social. Technical report (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    J. Iparraguirre, R. Ma, Efficiency in the provision of social care for older people. A three-stage data envelopment analysis using self-reported quality of life. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 49, 33–46 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Jensen, W. Meckling, Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency cost and ownership structure. J. Financ. Econ. 3(4), 305–360 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    K. Knox, E. Blankmyer, J. Stutzman, Organizational efficiency and quality in texas nursing facilities. Health Care Manag. Sci. 6, 175–188 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    P. Kooreman, Nursing home care in the Netherlands: a nonparametric efficiency analysis. J. Health Econ. 13(3), 301–316 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Y. Li, X. Cai, Z. Ye, L. Glance, C. Harrington, D. Mukamel, Satisfaction with Massachusetts nursing home care was generally high during 2005–2009, with some variability across facilities. Health Aff (Millwood) 32(8), 1416–1425 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    M. Marques, IPSS: Uma Abordagem Fiscal. TOC 120, 45–47 (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    MSSS and UMP, Protocolo de Cooperação 2011–2012. Technical report, Ministério da Solidariedade e da Segurança Social and União das Mutualidades Portuguesas (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    MSSS, UMP, CNIS, UMP, Protocolo de Cooperação 2013–2014. Technical report, Ministério da Solidariedade e da Segurança Social, União das Misericórdias Portuguesas, Confederação Nacional das Instituições de Solidariedade and União das Mutualidades Portuguesas (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    J. Nyman, D. Bricker, Profit incentives and technical efficiency in the production of nursing home care. Rev. Econ. Stat. 71(4), 586–594 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Y. Ozcan, Health Care Benchmarking and Performance Evaluation - An Assessment using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) (Fred Hillier, Stanford, 2008)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Y. Ozcan, S. Wogen, L. Mau, Efficiency evaluation of skilled nursing facilities. J. Med. Syste. 22(4), 221–224 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    M. Rantz, D. Mehr, L. Popejoy, M. Stauffacher, L. Hicks, V. Grando, V. Conn, R. Porter, J. Scott, M. Maas, Nursing home care quality: a multidimensional theoretical model integrating the views of consumers and providers. J. Nurs. Care Quality 12(3), 47–54 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    D. Rosko, A. Chilingerian, S. Zinn, E. Aaronson, The effect of ownership, operating environment and strategic choices on nursing homes efficiency. Med. Care 33(10), 1001–1021 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    UMP, Misericórdias Nacionais. Technical report, União das Misericórdias Portuguesas (2017),
  34. 34.
    Y. Wang, L. Chou, The Efficiency of Nursing Homes in Taiwan: An Empirical Study Using Data Envelopment Analysis. Technical report (2003)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    J. Wooldridge, Introductory Econometrics - A Modern Approach (South Western College Publishing, Ohio, 2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • André S. Veloso
    • 1
    Email author
  • Clara Bento Vaz
    • 2
  • Jorge Alves
    • 3
  1. 1.Polytechnic Institute of BragançaBragançaPortugal
  2. 2.Centre for Management and Industrial Engineering (CEGI/INESC TEC)Polytechnic Institute of BragançaBragançaPortugal
  3. 3.OBEGEF/UNIAG; Polytechnic Institute of BragançaBragançaPortugal

Personalised recommendations