We also show that state-funded residents live in worse quality care homes across the board - with largest inequalities in the richest areas.

We show that in England the best homes open in the richest places...

... It's almost exactly the opposite for the worst quality homes.

Secondly, we show that the "ownership gap" in care quality - a widely shown phenomenon of for-profit care homes being worse quality than other kinds - is only true in England when care homes are providing care for state-funded residents.

We find that the probability of a care home being rated as good or outstanding is dependent on the number of self-funded residents they care for (x axis in figure = % self-funders).

This is particularly true in for-profit care homes.

This has several large implications...

We analyse over 350,000 care home residents in England, their funding status, and what that means for the quality of care homes they live in.

We show that self-funded residents live in the richest areas, and are disproportionately in for-profit care homes in the richest areas.

New paper out today reveals scale of inequalities in social care!

💰 Care homes are better rated with more self-funded residents
👔 But inequalities in care only exist in the for-profit sector
📈 Outsourcing to for-profit sector accelerates inequalities of two-tier care

Link: doi.org/10.1093/agei...

New paper out in Lancet Healthy Longevity:

We get access to which care homes have put residents' safety at risk and are forced to close.

Shock finding: almost all of them are run for-profit...

www.thelancet.com/journals/lan...

New review in Lancet Public Health with @aaronreeves.bsky.social:

What is the impact of healthcare privatisation on quality of care?

"Health-care privatisation has almost never had a positive effect on the quality of care... But it is not benign either..."

Link: www.thelancet.com/journals/lan...