( ) Advisor Ching-Peng Peng, Ph.D. P96322014 104 7 July 2015
... 1... 1... 4... 7... 8... 9... 11... 12... 16... 18... 23... 25... 25... 26... 29... 35... 35... 37... 40... 42... 53... 53... 57... 59...65 I
II
1-1... 5 1-2... 6 2-1... 20 3-1... 27 3-2... 28 3-3... 32 3-4... 33 4-1... 35 4-2... 36 1-1... 4 1-2 NHE GDP... 5 1-3... 8 2-1... 14 2-2... 15 3-1 102... 34 III
IV
84 87 96 91 99 102 84 14 6 15~65 84 3 99% 95% 2012 2002 2013 2009 1
317 600 2012 2010 5.17% 6% 1998 2004 2002 2004 2002 1 2% 1 2
3
84 95% 98 600 99 4.55% 5.17% 1-1 4
1-1 OECD 2012 24.1% 6.4% 2012 11.2% OECD OECD 31 100 GDP 1.0% NHE 2.6% 1-2 NHE GDP 5
1-2 NHIE,Health Expenditure of National Health Insurance 85 87 87 NHIE NHE 100 GDP 137,450 1.0% 100 NHE 9,103 2.6% NHIE 4,636 3.6% NHE GDP 6.6% NHIE GDP 3.4% NHIE NHE 50.9% 1 Exploration 2 Description 3 Explanation 6
7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1-3 1-3 8
Literature Analysis Documentary analysis Content Analysis Informational Analysis 1999 247 9
10
- 2004 2010 2013 2003 2011 -- 2002 2013 2012 2012 20042008 2000 1999 2000 1998a 2011 2011 11
2003 2011 2003 2011 2% 5.17% ( 4.91%) 1.55%~5.17% 31 ( ) ( ) 2% 5.17% 3 0% 12
1. ( ) 2 31 18.2 218.4 218.4 500 218.4 500 (1) ( ) (2) ( ) 70 ( ) 1/3 65 15% 13
65 65 1998 2001 2005 2007 2013 2-1 14
2.3 1998 2001 2013 2-2 2% 4.91% 1.47%~4.91% 2013 15
2003 Gottret andschieber 2006 1993 2003 1993 Gottret and Schieber 2006 2013 1998 2001 1999 5,000 ( 103 9 1 ) 16
5,000 5,000 17
2003 House 1993 Quade 1989 Weiss 1998 Dunn 1994 2001 2004 Guba Lincoln 1989 Fourth Generation Evaluation 18
2-8 measurement description judgment negotiation 2000 1960 1. 2. Anderson Nachmias 3. - - - Rossi and Freemam 1993 Program monitoring Posavac& Carey 1996 the evaluation of need the evaluation of process the evaluation of outcomes the evaluation of efficiency 19
2-1 - 1980 Nakamura & Smallwood 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1988 Starling 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1993 Rossi 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1994 Dunn 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1997 Vedung 1. 2. 3. 1997 Patton 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Kettner& Morney 1999 1 Summative evaluation 20
2 Outcome evaluation 3 Adequacy of performance evaluation 4 5 Cost-efficiency evaluation (2003) ( Program monitoring) Dunn( 1994 ) 21
Dunn 2000 Dunn 1994 22
87 96 91 4.25% 4.55% 99 4.55% 5.71% 102 23
24
20 59% 25
20 4.5%~6.5% 21 2 1 25 4.25% 83 7 9 3 2 1 6% 1 4.25% 2 1 3 3-1 26
3-1 80 1.36 3-2 27
3-2 28
84 3 91 9 99 4 2 98 20 1 1,109 6 66.1% 54.9% 3 4 60~70 75% 102 1 1 29
36% 5.17% 4.91% 36% 4 1. 2. 1. 2. 3. 30
1 4 6 5 2% 5 3-3 1 1 3 31
3-3 (%) 30 70 0 30 35 35 30 60 10 100 0 0 60 0 40 30 0 70 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 100 30 0 70 60 0 40 2013/01/08 32
3-4 102 102 6 103 8 31 402.84 16 49.53% 199.54 6 50.47% 203.29 6 88.92 43.74% 39.97 19.66% 28.18 13.86% 24.72 12.16% 13.86 6.82% 7.64 3.76% 33
5,000 19,999 103 15 103 9 83 % 25 6.1% 28 7.0% 4 40 9.9% 14 3.5% 89 22.1% 8 1.9% 199 49.5% 3-1 102 34
2 4-1 4-1 1. 102 2. 5000 3. 6% 2% 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 4-2 35
4-2 A1 A2 2015/06/04 2015/07/09 B1 2015/06/24 B2 C1 C2 2015/06/09 2015/06/24 2015/03/21 36
2% A1 102 7,, A2 37
B1 6 5, 10 B2 C1 C2 38
A1 A2,, B1 B2 ~ C1 C2 39
A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 40
27 5000 ~2 2 6 27 2 6 C2 41
2000 5000 A1 5000 A2 2 5 2 6 5 6 B1 5000 42
B2 C1 C2 : 43
50 9A 9B 50 50A 50B 1 2 44
/ / 45
/ / 46
/ 47
48
2% ICA 1. 1 A. B. 49
2 2. 1 2 50
51
52
53
54
2% 55
56
57
58
2006 2010 2011 2010 2011 -- 192 254-265 2010 -- 29 11 43-47 2010 17 -- 53 10 34-38 2008 2005 2008 153:22-35 -,2007 2011 1312:7-10,2006,2012 59
2012 55-8:31-36 2012 2012 100 2014 2014 103 2013 103 150 2002 577 2011 A13 1998 : 2001 2012 2013 23 6-17 2006 38 5 97-112 2011 43 1-35 2011a54 2 37-41 2011b 2011 2008 153 22-35 2013 60
32 1 6-17 7 5 747-756 2011-2004 2002 18 2 1-24 2011 103 3 102 12 2002 2001 90 8912-3- 464 0310471 2004b 5 93 10 2006 2001 2004/11/17 2002;21:157-63 2008 : 2 2007 -- 3 -- 2003 61
1999 -- 1999 2000a http://www.npf.org.tw/particle-31-1.html 2000.08.14 2000b http://www.npf.org.tw/particle-31-1.html 2000.08.15 2000c http://www.npf.org.tw/particle-31-1.html 2000.08.17 2000d http://www.npf.org.tw/particle-31-1.html 2000.08.18 2003 2002 2008 153 97 2 22-35 2007 2003 2007 2006 2002 Nakanishi, S. and Nakayama, N. (2001). The effects of demographic change on health and medical expenditures: A simulation analysis. In Ogura, S., Tachibanaki, T. and Wise, D.(eds.) Aging issues in the United States and Japan, The University of Chicago Press, 223-248 Werblow, A., Felder, S. and Zweifel, P. (2007). Populationageingand healthcare expenditure:aschoolof redherrings? HealthEconomics,16 10 : 1109-1126. 62
Zewifel, P., Felder, S. and Meiers. (1999). Ageing of population and health care expenditure: A red herring? Health Economics, 8: 485-496. Chein, Tein-Cheng, & Hsiu-Li Chen, (2006). Policy-Acceptances of Taiwan s national health insurance reforms: An investigation from suppliers aspects. Pan-Pacific Management Review, 9(2): 19-41. Barry R. Furrow et al. (2001). Health Law: Cases, Materials and Problems. Brinkerhoff, D. W. and B. L. Crosby. (2002). Managing Policy Reform Concepts and Tolls for Decision-makers in Developing and Transitioning Countries. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press. Health for everyone, The Economist Apr. 8th, 2006. Immergut, E. M. (1992). The Rule of the Game: The Logic of Health Policy-making in France,Switzerland, and Sweden. In Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis S. Steinmo, K. Thelen, and F. Longstreth, eds. New York Cambridge University Press. 63
64
A1 2015 6 4 102 5000 2000 5000 6% 2% 4.91% 6% 4.91% 6% 65
( ) 66
67
A2 2015 7 9 102 5000 5000 6% 2% 2% 102 7, 68
, ( ) 69
B1 2015 6 25 102 5000 2 5 2 6 5 6 6% 2% 2% 70
,, ( ) 71
36% 158 72
B2 2015 6 9 102 5000 5000 6% 2% 73
6 5, 10 ( ) 74
75
C1 2015 6 24 102 12 23 700 200 5000 6% 2% 6% 4.91% 2% ~ 76
( ) 77
C2 2015 3 21 102 5000 6% 2% 2% 6% 6% 78
65 75 22K 25K 4 6 ( ) 27 5000 ~2 2 6 27 2 79
6 NGO 80
1 2 3 4 81
5 6 82
7 8 9 83
10 11 12 84