1a. Based on your experience and familiarity with the Pew program, what did the program really accomplish? What are the most important contributions?
I'm not sure I can differentiate between the contributions and the accomplishments. However, on a personal level, it helped me to get my PhD, which changed my career orientation. In addition, it put me in contact with a network of people who also were involved in health policy issues. At a broader level, I think that the important contributions or accomplishments of the program were that it helped establish health policy as an area of study, which had not been much studied at the point when the program began, and certainly took it out of somewhat, the traditional areas in which health policy was usually associated with, which was either as an adjunct to hospital administration or health economics. The Pew program brought health policy out from there.
There have been great changes in other health policy programs, and I think part of that is a result of what the Pew programs accomplished.
Can you name any particular programs?
There are certainly many more health policy programs than there used to be. For example Harvard has one, and Hopkins now has a fairly large and well-established health policy program. I don't think Hopkins had much of one all that long ago. So, here you have two of the biggest, most prestigious programs around, neither of which got any direct funding from Pew for their health policy programs yet, nonetheless, I think in part modeled some of Pew's activities. I remember back in November at the networking dinner that Kate Korman mentioned that Joe Newhouse took the Pew program to Harvard with him. The other place where Pew may have had an influence (and I'm not sure exactly what they are doing now) is at Berkeley. Helen Schauffler was a Pew fellow and is now one of the health policy professors at the School of Public Health. My impression has been that she sort of carried over some of what she studied.
Can you speak a bit to the overall accomplishments of the Pew programs as a network or set of programs?
The most direct benefit was that they trained a relatively large cadre of researchers and then, for the UCSF (Uni-