Kathleen Farrell, BA, Tasseli McKay, MPH, Heather Beil, PhD, Lexie Grove, BA, Stephanie Kissam, MPH, Erin Mallonee, MS, and Melissa Romaire, PhD RTI International Printer Friendly Version in PDF Format (68 PDF pages)
In states with a county-administered Medicaid programs, counties face many decisions and challenges in implementing Medicaid expansions, from operations to outreach, enrollment and renewal. This report examined the issues facing counties to gain an understanding of these efforts, identify and synthesize lessons from early Medicaid expansion effort
Characteristic Alabama Florida Michigan New Jersey APPENDIX TABLE 1 LOGISTIC REGRESSION OF THE PROBABILITY OF MAINTAINING MEDICAID COVERAGE WHEN ADULTS LEAVE AFDC (Adults in HMOs Excluded) Estimated Odds Ratio a
Czajka, John L. “Analysis of Children’s Health Insurance Patterns: Findings from the SIPP.” Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., 1999. Dubay, Lisa, and Genevieve Kenney. “Effects of Medicaid Expansions on Insurance Coverage of Children.” Future of Children , vol. 6, no. 1, 1996, pp. 152-61. Ellwood, David T., and E. Ka
Study findings add to the body of evidence--that declines in the welfare caseload which began in 1995 are likely to have a noticeable effect on state Medicaid programs in the future, in terms of overall enrollment, caseload mix, and per capita expenditure levels. The findings also point to problems of continuity in Medicaid enrollment, which may b
Welfare Leavers and Medicaid Dynamics: Five States in 1995. How Much Turnover and Churning Occurs in Medicaid Caseloads?
A final study objective was to look at the extent to which turnover and churning in each state’s Medicaid caseload might be contributing to enrollment declines. As background for understanding these additional measures, it is useful to review the different ways Medicaid enrollment is counted. Most analyses of trends in Medicaid enrollment rely o
Welfare Leavers and Medicaid Dynamics: Five States in 1995. Were the Welfare Leavers Staying on Medicaid Different From Those Who Left?
Policymakers and Medicaid officials are understandably interested in whether welfare leavers who also leave Medicaid are different from those who remain enrolled in Medicaid. In particular, they want to know whether welfare leavers who continue on Medicaid are likely to be more costly than those who leave Medicaid would have been. Differences in e
A key part of our analysis was to see what happened to the Medicaid status of individuals leaving AFDC. We focused on those who left from February through July 1995, so that we could follow the Medicaid status for six months after AFDC exit. Six months seemed to us a sufficient time to assess whether Medicaid coverage continued. We counted persons
Consistent with the national pattern, all five study states experienced a decline in Medicaid enrollment for children and adults during 1995, although the extent of the decline varied (Table 3). New Jersey’s Medicaid enrollment in December was only 0.8 percent below its January level, compared to a 4.2 difference in Florida by year end. The othe
Welfare Leavers and Medicaid Dynamics: Five States in 1995. Eligibility Policies of Study States in 1995
By 1995, interstate differences in Medicaid eligibility policy had been considerably reduced as a result of the federally mandated poverty-related expansions for children. That same year, all states were required to extend Medicaid coverage to children under age six and pregnant women with family income below 133 percent of the federal poverty lev
Concerns about Medicaid enrollment patterns are not new. Although Medicaid enrollment of children and their parents increased by just over 60 percent during the period from 1987 to 1995,
State welfare caseloads have been declining at an unprecedented rate since 1994, partly as a result of state and federal welfare reform efforts and partly because of a strong economy. From a peak of 14.2 million recipients in 1994, by 1998 monthly welfare enrollment had dropped more than 40 percent to an average of 8.3 million recipients. Medicaid
Study findings add to the body of evidence that declines in the welfare caseload which began in 1995 are likely to have a noticeable effect on state Medicaid programs, in terms of overall enrollment, caseload mix, and per capita expenditure levels. The findings also point to problems of continuity in Medicaid enrollment, which may be contributing
State welfare caseloads have been declining at an unprecedented rate since 1994, partly as a result of state and federal welfare reform efforts and partly because of a strong economy. Medicaid enrollment for children and their parents has been shrinking as well (although less so than welfare), in spite of state efforts to expand their Medicaid eli
By Marilyn Ellwood & Carol Irvin Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. 50 Church Street, Fourth Floor Cambridge, MA 02138 April 14, 2000
Analysis of the California In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Plus Waiver Demonstration Program. References
Aday LA, R Anderson. (1974). A framework for the study of access to medical care. Health Services Research, 9(3):208-220. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). (2007a). Pediatric Quality Indicators, Revision 3.1 . Internet address: http://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/software.htm .
Analysis of the California In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Plus Waiver Demonstration Program. Implications for Medicaid and IHSS Expenditures
For all recipient age groups, IHSS expenditures, adjusting impairment severity and service needs, are expected to be lower relative to those with Non-Relative providers when Parents, Spouses, and Other Relatives living in the household are paid IHSS providers. This cost difference arises because an IHSS algorithm adjusts the authorized time for ho
Analysis of the California In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Plus Waiver Demonstration Program. Recipients Age 65 or More
Spouses were present among about 25% of this age group of IHSS recipients, but except for those paid as Spouse providers, the number able/available reduced to about 3%. When a recipient’s provider was an Other Relative or a Non-Relative, almost half of the spouses present were also IHSS recipients. Recipients with IHSS-paid Spouse providers tend