Over nine million Americans receive benefits from both Medicare and Medicaid costing over $315 billion in health care services in the two programs combined. The dual eligibles account for 15 percent of the Medicaid population and almost 40 percent of all Medicaid expenditures for medical services; and 20 percent of the enrollees in Medicare, but 30 percent of the expenditures.
In the move to increase access and coverage while enhancing the value of the health care dollar, the direct care workforce provides an important contribution to coordinated care in a high quality system. This toolkit, co-written by Bill Erwin and Deanna Okrent of the Alliance, aims to provide an array of resources and perspectives that describe numerous challenges to assuring an adequate workforce and some of the proposed solutions by the ACA. Supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Medicaid can be as much as 25 percent or more of a state’s expenditures — a share that appears to be rising, not shrinking. In 2011 Medicaid accounted for 24 percent of total state spending, including federal grants. To address their budgetary challenges, an increasing number of states are turning to Medicaid managed care. As of 2009, 47 percent of all Medicaid beneficiaries were enrolled in a managed care plan. Looking to save money in categories where the most is being spent, more states are starting to enroll older beneficiaries and those with disabilities in such plans, not just for acute care services, but for long-term services and supports (LTSS).
This is the second event in a three-part series of discussions on costs, the factors driving them up and what (if anything) can be done about them. The series marks the Alliance for Health Reform’s 20th year of promoting informed and balanced discussion of health policy issues.
The ongoing debate over the federal budget and deficit reduction presents a balancing act for policy makers, as many compelling interests compete for scarce dollars. But for 10 million older adults and people with disabilities who need long-term services and supports, there is a “rebalancing act” in progress. The aim is to serve more people at home and in the community, and fewer people in institutions.
The high and rising cost of health care is a central concern for governments at all levels, employers and families. A large portion of the cost problem can be traced to the care received by persons with chronic conditions like asthma or diabetes. Treating those with multiple chronic conditions, including the elderly and disabled populations, accounts for 30 percent of total U.S. health care spending as of 2010. Half of this amount is spent by Medicare and Medicaid on behalf of beneficiaries eligible for both programs.
There is a national epidemic of chronic disease. Though it does not get the news coverage devoted to floods and tornadoes, it deserves attention and is starting to get it. There is a groundswell of activity in local communities to support healthier lifestyles and help people make long-lasting and sustainable changes that can reduce their risk for chronic diseases. A number of provisions in the health reform law are aimed directly at improving population health by addressing conditions where Americans live, learn, work, and play – at their schools, worksites, restaurants and more.
This was an introductory session designed to inform the staff of new members of Congress both in Washington and in district or state offices about the people who receive benefits from both the Medicaid and Medicare programs (often called “dual eligibles”). The briefing was designed to be helpful to staff members unfamiliar with this important issue.
Most of the emphasis during the health reform debate centered on affordable health coverage for the uninsured, strategies to control the growth in health care spending, and delivery system reforms. Relatively little attention was given to the many provisions of the new law that deal directly with long-term care.
Almost every day, we learn of a new hearing or briefing about ways to improve our health care system. The White House, Congress, advocates and stakeholders are fully engaged. The elephant in the room during those discussions is long-term care. Despite being so large, it suffers from the possibility of being ignored. This March 9 forum, supported by the SCAN Foundation, brought together opinion leaders and stakeholders to explore options for the future of long-term care in the reform debate. Participants considered key policy questions on how to move from testing models at the edges to implementing feasible options through health reform.
It is widely accepted that the U.S. health care system, although touted by some as the “best system in the world,” has room for improvement. Many people have no regular health care provider. Care is often fragmented and lacks coordination, which compromises quality and efficiency. Incentives for providers have not caught up with the demographics of chronic care. Some 75 percent of Medicare spending is on beneficiaries with five or more chronic conditions – and those people see an average of 14 different physicians a year.
If you think that all poor Americans can get health coverage through Medicaid, think again. Except in a few states with federal waivers, adults must not only meet income and asset requirements, but must fit into a category of persons for which coverage is available.
An estimated 125 million individuals in the United States have a chronic illness, disability or functional limitation. Chronic diseases are the number one cause of death and disability in the United States and account for three quarters of the nation’s health spending.
Culture change in the long-term care world involves many players – residents, administrators, workers, lawmakers, policy analysts – sharing a common vision. One such vision attracting attention has been developed by a group of citizens, providers and advocates known as Pioneers who are exploring alternatives to traditional nursing facilities. Their goal: facilities that are resident-centered, less institutional and more home-like. This involves trying to piece together financing from Medicaid, Medicare and private funding sources.
The American health system is focused on curing, and spends billions of dollars on treatment at the end of life. But now more than 40 million adult Americans suffer with life-altering, chronic health conditions. They and their families are often more concerned with pain management, comfort care, and coordinating care as they transition from setting to setting. As people live longer with grave chronic illness are they getting quality care? Where in the delivery of care spectrum should palliative care come into play? Sponsored by the Alliance and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
The Long-Term Care Partnership Program allows purchasers of private long-term care insurance to qualify eventually for Medicaid coverage of long-term care services without having to meet the same asset requirements as other Medicaid applicants. Partnership programs began in 1987 in four states – New York, California, Connecticut, and Indiana.
Treatment of Severe Chronic Illness: What Explains Cost and Quality Variations? Should We Be Concerned?
Some Medicare beneficiaries receive significantly more hospital-based services during the last two years of life than do other beneficiaries. The number of physician visits for Medicare beneficiaries can also vary greatly. What accounts for this variation? Do patients receiving more services tend to get better care, or not? Should policymakers take steps to more closely examine the relationship between spending and the volume of services provided at different facilities?
The costs of caring for the elderly have been growing steadily higher. Spending on Medicare benefits accounted for 17 percent of the nation’s total health care spending in 2004. With baby boomers retiring, and Medicare benefits changing, this percentage is expected to grow in the future. Americans spend approximately $140 billion on long-term care in the U.S., most of it on the elderly, and Medicaid picks up almost half of the cost. Even among large private firms, health care costs for older people have taken their toll with only one-third offering health benefits to their retirees today, compared with two-thirds in 1988.