1731-7398 Healthy ageing in Germany – common care and insurance funding. Institutional and financial dimension of health promotion for older people Golinowska Stanisława author Huter Kai author Sowada Christoph author Pavlova Milena author Sowa Agnieszka author Rothgang Heinz author Collegium Medicum Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego University of Bremen, SOCIUM – Research Center on Inequality and Social Policy, Germany High-profile area Health Sciences, University of Bremen, Bremen Department of Health Services Research; CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Center; Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, The Netherlands / Top Institute Evidence-Based Education Research (TIER), Maastricht University, The Netherlands Department of Social Policy, Institute of Labour and Social Studies, Warsaw, Poland Correspondence to: Stanisława Golinowska stanislawa.golinowska@uj.edu.pl Correspondence to: Kai Huter Correspondence to: Christoph Sowada Correspondence to: Milena Pavlova Correspondence to: Agnieszka Sowa a.sowa@ipiss.com.pl Correspondence to: Heinz Rothgang 30 01 2017 Tom 15, Numer 1 2017 20 33 Copyright © 2017 2017 <div id="cke_pastebin">In Germany responsibilities for health promotion and prevention lies with a multitude of different actors and institutions. The institutional arrangement of health promotion is shaped by the German federal structure of the state on the one hand and by a health care system that is characterized by divided responsibilities between governmental organisations, self-administered bodies and non-governmental organisations on the other hand. Although federal-level programs are successfully implemented in the country, the attempt of the Federal government to consolidate and clarify responsibilities in the public health area meets resistance. The Preventive Health Care Act from 2015 is an attempt to strengthen health promotion, its effective impact will be for the future to show.</div> <div id="cke_pastebin">Health promotion activities are initiated and provided by a variety of institutions: governmental, self-administered and voluntary (NGOs) often based on networks form. They cover activities on federal, Länder and local level. The Federal Ministry of Health and federal health agencies (specially BZgA) play an important role in this field. They created a number of health promotion regulation and activities initiatives which added to disease and addiction prevention. In health promotion for older people (HP4OP) programs, there is also a number of regionally and locally oriented initiatives. </div> <div id="cke_pastebin">In this paper, we outline main features of the HP4OP activities in Germany with regard to institutions and financing mechanism. In addition, we describe health-targeting programmes/projects indicated as good practices:(a) established and developed in Germany and (b) provided by the European Commission with significant participation of German institutions. The multitude and variety of HP4OP programs differentiate positively German health system from other health systems in ageing countries. </div> 1 Busse R., Blümel M., Germany: health system review, “Health Systems in Transition” 2014; 16 (2): 1–331, http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/255932/HiT-Germany.pdf?ua=1; accessed: 17.03.2016. 2 Raphael D., The political economy of health promotion: part 1, national commitments to provision of the prerequisites of health, “Health Promotion International” 2011; 28 (1): 91–111. 3 Robert Koch Institut, Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes gemeinsam getragen von RKI und Destatis, Gesundheit in Deutschland, Berlin 2015. 4 Kaba-Schönstein L., Gesundheitsförderung V: Die Entwicklung in Deutschland ab Mitte der 1980er Jahre, Leitbegriffe der Gesundheitsförderung, Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung, letzte Aktualisierung am 15.02.2011, http://www.leitbegriffe.bzga.de/alphabetisches-verzeichnis/gesundheitsfoerderung-v-die-entwicklung-in-deutschland-ab-mitte-der-1980er-jahre/; accessed: 30.08.2016. 5 Sitko S., Kowalska-Bobko I., Mokrzycka A., Zabdyr-Ja­mróz M., Domagała A., Magnavita N., Poscia A., Rogala M.,  6 Szetela A., Golinowska S., Institutional analysis of health promotion for older people in Europe, “BMC Health Services Research” 2016; 16 (Suppl. 5): 327. 7 Blümel S., Akteure, Angebote und Strukturen in: Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung (eds), Leitbegriffe der Gesundheitsförderung und Prävention, Verlag für Gesundheitsförderung, Werbach–Gamburg 2011. 8 Kunkel T., Good practices in the field of health promotion and primary prevention, Germany Country Review, JA-Chrodis Project, Federal Centre for Health Education (BZgA), Cologne 2015, http://www.chrodis.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Germany-country-review; accessed: 14.09.2016. 9 Walter U., Schwartz W., Prävention: Institutionen und Strukturen, in: Public Health Buch. Gesundheit und Gesundheitswesen, F.M. Schwartz (red.), Urban &amp; Fischer, München 2003, 2012. 10 Kooperationsverbund gesundheitsziele.de, Nationales Gesundheitsziel “Gesund älter werden”, Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (red.), Berlin 2012, http://gesundheitsziele.de//cms/medium/814/Gesund_aelter_werden_020512.pdf; accessed: 30.08.2016. 11 Statistisches Bundesamt, Gesundheit, Ausgaben, Wiesbaden 2015, https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thema­tisch/Gesundheit/Gesundheitsausgaben/AusgabenGesundheitLangeReihePDF_2120712.pdf?__blob=publicationFile; accessed: 10.03.2016. 12 Häring H.-U., Fritsche A., Prävention des Typ-2-Diabetes. TULIP-Studie – Tübinger Lebensstil Interventionsprogramm, in: Stierle M., Stierle G., Roth B., Bertelsmannstiftung (eds), Deutscher Präventionspreis 2005. Gesund in der zweiten Lebenshälfte (50plus). Die Preisträger und Nominierten, Druckerei festge, Oelde 2005. 13 Kuhlmann A., Koch K., Gesundheitsförderung und Prävention für ältere Menschen im Setting Kommune, Institut für Gerontologie an der Technischen Universität Dortmund, Dortmund 2009, http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/13261-1442-1-30.pdf; accessed:14.04.2016 14 Gerlinger T., Präventionsgesetz, Leitbegriffe der Gesundheitsförderung, Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung, letzte Aktualisierung am 12.07.2016, http://www.bzga.de/leitbegriffe/?id=angebote&amp;idx=296; accessed: 20.10.2016. 16 BMEL (Federal Ministry of Food) and BMG (Federal Ministry of Health), Mehr Bewegung im Alter – Aktives Leben im Alter fördern, 2014, http://www.bewegung-foerdern.de/fileadmin/user_upload/MAIN-bilder/ZfB/Berlin/Mehr-Bewegung-im-Alltag.pdf; accessed: 14.09.2016. 17 Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung (BZgA), Good Practice in the Field of Health Promotion and Primary Prevention, Joint Action on Chronic Diseases and Promoting Healthy Ageing Across the Life Cycle, EU project JA-CHRODIS, 2013. 18 Deutsche Bundesregierung, Deutschlands Zukunft gestalten. Koalitionsvertrag zwischen CDU, CSU und SPD–18. Legislaturperiode, 2013, http://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/2013/2013-12-17-koalitionsvertrag.pdf; accessed: 25.08.2016. 19 EuroHealthNet (Ingrid Stegeman, Terese Otte-Trojel, Caro­line Costongs and John Considine), Healthy and active ageing. A compendium of programmes, good practices and other resources for promoting and sustaining the well-being of “younger” older people, with a specific reference to socially deprived and migrant groups in Europe. Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung (BZgA) incorporating work under taken by Thomas Altgeld, Landesvereinigung für Gesundheit und Akademie für Sozialmedizin Niedersachsen e. V. and Judith Sinclair-Cohen, 2012. 20 Gesetz zur Stärkung der Gesundheitsförderung und der Prävention (Präventionsgesetz – PrävG), vom 17. Juli 2015, Bundesgesetzblatt Jahrgang 2015, Teil I Nr. 31, Bonn 24.07.2015, http://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/start.xav?startbk=Bundesanzeiger_.BGBl&amp;jumpTo=bgbl115s1368.pdf; accessed: 30.08.2016.