Content by Keyword: WIC

TABLE 7 Average Monthly Premiums for Second-Lowest Cost Silver Plans for a 27-Year-Old (Before Tax Credits), 2014 and 2015 in Selected States

The Affordable Care Act is working to create a dynamic, competitive Marketplace, with more choice and affordable premiums in 2015. This offers new opportunities for consumers to comparison shop to select the plan that best meets their needs and budget. More choice also means more competition between plans that in turn results in downward pressure

As described in Chapter I, many new primary data collection activities are planned for the second evaluation year, including a 51-state survey investigating state simplifications and administrator views on ELE, case studies in ELE and non-ELE states including key informant interviews and focus groups, and a utilization analysis in a subset of ELE

Our impact analysis finds significant evidence that ELE implementation increased Medicaid enrollment. Across a series of model specifications, estimated impacts of ELE were consistently positive, ranging between 4.0 and 7.3 percent, with most estimates statistically significant at the 5 percent level. Overall, these estimates had a central tendenc

As described in Chapter II, as of January 2012, eight states had received Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) approval of ELE state plan amendments (SPAs). Table IV.1 summarizes the programs and the implementation date assumptions used for the empirical analysis. This chapter combines this information with Medicaid/CHIP enrollment d

Children enrolling through ELE appear to be similar to other Medicaid and CHIP enrollees in most respects except for one: we observe sizable differences in the distribution of age by enrollment pathway, suggesting that ELE may have been successful at enrolling some traditionally hard-to-reach older children. Additionally, there are smaller but not

In addition to New Jersey’s second ELE partnership with the NSLP, which had been implemented in all counties by October 2011, three new states—Colorado, Georgia, and South Carolina—have received approval from CMS to implement ELE programs since January 2011. Below are brief descriptions of these states’ ELE processes based on our review of

As of April 2012, Alabama’s ELE program has been used primarily to streamline Medicaid administrative processing. Alabama’s Express Lane partner agency is the Department of Human Resources, which provides information for ELE processing from SNAP and TANF. Families must still initiate a coverage application or respond to a renewal notice. Most

As of April 1, 2012, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) had approved nine states–Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Oregon, and South Carolina–to implement Express Lane Eligibility (ELE). Even among this small number of states, the striking variation in ELE designs reflects the flexibility th

Section 203 of CHIPRA authorizes ELE and permits states to rely on findings of other public agencies to determine whether a child satisfies one or more requirements for Medicaid or CHIP eligibility. In doing so, states can disregard technical differences in how these programs define the household members whose earnings are considered in determinin

As of April 1, 2012, CMS had approved nine states (Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Oregon, and South Carolina) to implement ELE. Five of the states (Alabama, Colorado, Louisiana, Maryland, and South Carolina) are approved for ELE in their Medicaid programs, while four (Georgia, Iowa, New Jersey, and Oregon) are a

Belsky, J., Burchinal, M., McCartney, K., Lowe Vandell, D., & Clarke-Stewart, K.A., Tresch Owen, M. (2007, March/April). “Are There Long-Term Effects of Early Child Care?” Child Development , Volume 78, Number 2.. Besharov, D. & Higney, C. (2006). Federal and State Child Care Expenditures (1997-2004): Rapid Growth Followed by Stead

In addition to providing descriptions of child care arrangements, the NHES also shows the amount of out-of-pocket expenses paid by their families.  Unlike the expenses shown on some surveys, the amounts shown on the NHES represent the amount the families paid for each child, instead of the total amount the families paid for all children in the ho

Prior literature has compared the economies of urban and rural areas.  According to data from the U.S.

Aarons, G.A., C. Glisson, P.D. Green, K. Hoagwood, K.J. Kelleher, J.A. Landsverk, Research Network on Youth Mental Health, J.R. Weisz, B. Chorpita, R. Gibbons, C. Glisson, E.P. Green, K. Hoagwood, P.S. Jensen, K. Kelleher, J. Landsverk, S. Mayberg, J. Miranda, L. Palinkas, and S. Schoenwald. "The Organizational Social Context of Mental Health Serv

Outcome measures would assess whether individuals receiving psychotherapy experience improvements in their symptoms and functioning across a broad range of life domains, including employment, school functioning, relationships, and engagement in the community (Hoagwood et al. 2012). The use of such measures would complement efforts already underway

The IHHP notice stipulates that grantees should demonstrate “a concerted effort . . . to integrate and coordinate cross-cutting resources in providing a comprehensive approach to HIV/AIDS housing and support services.” The IHHP sites we visited created program models involving significant service coordination among housing, health care, and ot

Unlike HOPWA, which focuses primarily on housing, most RWP funds are allocated to core medical services as required by law. In 2010, only 3.2 percent of total RWP Part A and Part B funds were spent on housing assistance. In contrast, two-thirds (67 percent) of HOPWA’s 2010 expenditures were allocated to housing (Figure II.2).

Description Core Poor Lifted Out Thrown In OPM Poor SPM Poor Sample Size N = 7,666 N = 4,286 N = 1,828 N = 11,952 N = 9,494 Any SNAP 51.7% 67.7% 13.9% 56.9% 45.0% Mean SNAP $2,429 $3,561 $324 2797

The smallest of the three groups of children is the 2.4 million children who are found to be poor under the SPM but not the OPM, or those who are “thrown in” to poverty under the SPM. Like the lifted-out group, these children are in families that are fairly well-connected to the labor market. Fully 87.4 percent of these “thrown-in” childre