目前由民主先進國家所發展的公民參與模式，往往假設社會團體已經充分參與政策制定。我們認為這個假設不適用於新興民主國家。二代健保公民參與組參考審議民主的理念，提出「法人論壇」的構想，試圖做為新興民主國家提升社會團體參與政策的管道模式。我們舉辦「全民健保保費新制方案規劃法人論壇」，並評估其成效。我們發現，法人論壇能顯著提升團體代表的政策參與能力，在健保安日能和健保滿意度，都有顯著進步，尤其是健保體制外的團體，如社褔和病患團體。至於政治效能感、新制意見、和共識達成，法人論壇似乎比較能影響健保體制外的團體，而比較不能影響健保體制內的團體。我們發現參與者的參與經驗會影響審議的作用。我們建議，針對法人團體的政策參與，最好在政策規劃初期，即邀請他們參加。未來的法人論壇，應考量團體之間的權力關係，建立專家與團體代表雙向溝通的詢答模式，避免以固定的方案選項的抉擇作為結論內容，並逐步發展跨團體討論的機制，以促發社會團體更能充分參與政策討論。

Public participation methods that were developed in advanced democratic countries like Denmark and the United States have paid almost the whole attention to the general population but none to civic groups in terms of participants. In this article, we argue that for new democracy such as Taiwan, the public participation methods that focus on civic groups are as important as those for the general public. We developed a new public participation method "civic groups forum" and evaluated its effects in terms of deliberative democracy with the issue of premium reform in the National Health Insurance in Taiwan. The scheme of evaluation included both the outcome aspect (changes in policy literacy, policy satisfaction, and political efficacy) and the process aspect (independence, resources accessibility, structured decision making, influence on final policy, and reaching consensus and promoting solidarity). It applied a before-and-after study design with four categories of organized groups as participants. We found that the civic groups forum appears to have more significant effects on organized groups that are marginal in policymaking than on those of privilege. More practices and studies related to the civic groups forum are needed, how­ever. We made suggestions to the future of the civic groups forum. We also suggest to initiate a deliberation forum that facilitates dialogues between different types of organized groups to enhance the pubic participation in new democracy.