scholarly journals BARRIERS AND FACILITATORS TO IMPLEMENTING COMMUNITY FIRST CHOICE

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S771-S772
Author(s):  
Lisa Beauregard ◽  
Edward A Miller
Keyword(s):  
Activities Of Daily Living ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Services And Supports ◽  
State Plan

Abstract Community First Choice is a program within the Affordable Care Act that encourages states to expand Medicaid home and community-based services (HCBS). Specifically, this Medicaid state plan benefit provides states with an additional 6% federal match to promote greater rebalancing of long-term services and supports. Through Community First Choice, states can offer services that assist with activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, and health-related tasks. The program is optional for states, and, to date, eight states have pursued Community First Choice. The purpose of this study is to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementing Community First Choice in two states. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with individuals involved in HCBS policy nationally and in Maryland and Texas, including government bureaucrats, consumer advocates, and provider representatives. The results suggest that communication with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the enhanced federal match, and leveraging existing HCBS infrastructure facilitated implementation. Maryland and Texas encountered challenges implementing Community First Choice because of constraints posed by existing HCBS programs, ambitious timelines, limited staff resources, and insufficient engagement with external stakeholders. The findings suggest that implementing Community First Choice is a large undertaking, and states should ensure they have enough time and sufficient staffing for the implementation process. States should also understand how implementing Community First Choice will impact existing HCBS offerings and how leveraging HCBS infrastructure can facilitate implementation. The lessons from implementing Community First Choice can be informative to other states pursuing or contemplating this program.

scholarly journals BARRIERS AND FACILITATORS TO IMPLEMENTING THE BALANCING INCENTIVE PROGRAM (BIP)

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S156-S156
Author(s):  
Lisa Beauregard ◽  
Edward A Miller
Keyword(s):  
Structural Changes ◽  
Internal State ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Incentive Program ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Services And Supports ◽  
Consumer Advocates ◽  
Community Based Services

Abstract The Balancing Incentive Program (BIP) was an optional Medicaid program within the Affordable Care Act. States spending less than 50% of Medicaid long-term services and supports on home and community-based services (HCBS) were eligible for the program and could participate from 2011 to 2015. Participating states received an enhanced federal match in exchange for rebalancing LTSS spending and adopting structural changes to their long-term services and supports system. The purpose of this study is to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementing the BIP in two states. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with individuals involved in HCBS policy nationally and in Maryland and Texas, including government bureaucrats, consumer advocates, and provider representatives. Findings indicate that factors that facilitated Maryland and Texas’ implementation of the BIP were regular communication with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and their consultants, Mission Analytics Group, merging the BIP with existing HCBS programs, and the substantial amount of funding associated with the program. On the other hand, the short duration of the BIP presented a challenge for states because they needed to enact multiple changes within a limited period of time. In addition, state procurement and contracting processes impeded the speed with which BIP requirements could be met. Key stakeholders, including consumer advocacy and provider organizations, often felt as though their state implemented the BIP with minimal input from interested groups. The findings indicate that the structure of the Balancing Incentive Program as well as internal state factors influenced the program’s implementation.

scholarly journals Expanding Medicaid Coverage for Community-Based Long-Term Services and Supports: Lessons From Maryland’s Community First Choice Program

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (7) ◽  
pp. 745-750
Author(s):  
Julia Burgdorf ◽  
Jennifer Wolff ◽  
Amber Willink ◽  
Cynthia Woodcock ◽  
Karen Davis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community Settings ◽  
Personal Care ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Care Services ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Services And Supports ◽  
State Plan ◽  
Community Based Services

Community First Choice (CFC) is a Medicaid state plan option authorized through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that supports the delivery of long-term services and supports in home and community settings. We interviewed stakeholders in Maryland, one of the first states to adopt CFC, to assess challenges, benefits, and potential implications of this Medicaid option for state and federal policy makers. Study findings suggest that expanding coverage for home- and community-based services through CFC in Maryland has been financially feasible, expanded the personal care workforce, and supported a more equitable approach to personal care services. We conclude that greater coverage for home- and community-based long-term services is a promising avenue to improve access to care for high-need Medicaid beneficiaries.

scholarly journals Assessing Functional Need of Minority Older Adults Across Two Long-Term Services and Supports Settings

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 180-180
Author(s):  
Jasmine Travers ◽  
Andrew Cohen ◽  
Norma Coe ◽  
Mary Naylor
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Nursing Home ◽  
Activities Of Daily Living ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Comparison Group ◽  
Functional Limitations ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Services And Supports ◽  
Retirement Study

Abstract Research has suggested that growth in Black and Hispanic older adults’ nursing home (NH) use may be the result of disparities in options for long-term services and supports (LTSS). To investigate this issue, we aimed to determine whether there were no differences in the functional needs of racial and ethnic groups who received care in NHs versus the community. We identified respondents aged ≥65 years in the 2016 Health and Retirement Study who reported requiring caregiving help. We compared the site of care for Black and Hispanic older adults (minority group) to White older adults (comparison group). We performed unadjusted analyses to assess the association of functional need with community vs. NH care. Functional need was operationalized using a functional-limitations score and six individual activities of daily living (ADL). There were 186 minority older adults (community=78%, NH=22%) and 357 White older adults (community=50%, NH=50%). Across settings, minority older adults did not differ in age, marital status, and income, but a greater percentage of men were in NHs (48% versus 28%; p=0.01). The functional-limitations score was higher in NHs than in the community for both groups. Functional needs for the minority group were similar across the two settings in 2/6 ADLs (dressing p=0.11, toileting p=0.09), while White older adults in NHs were more impaired in all ADLs. Functional need for minority older adults primarily differed by setting while demographics did not. These are important factors to consider when implementing programs to keep older adults out of NHs and in the community.

scholarly journals Fatigue as a long-term risk factor for limitations in instrumental activities of daily living and/or mobility performance in older adults after 10 years

2016 ◽  
Vol Volume 11 ◽  
pp. 1579-1587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigrid Mueller-Schotte ◽  
Nienke Bleijenberg ◽  
Yvonne T. van der Schouw ◽  
Marieke J. Schuurmans
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Activities Of Daily Living ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Mobility Performance ◽  
Instrumental Activities

scholarly journals Review on Pricing Models for Long-term Care Insurance

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Syakir Asrulsani ◽  
Mazlynda Md Yusuf
Keyword(s):  
Activities Of Daily Living ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Protection Mechanism ◽  
Long Term Care Insurance ◽  
Risk Protection ◽  
Care Costs

Funding for long-term care costs among elderly people is a critical matter, especially due to high costs and an unexpected length of time. Placement for long-term care that is funded under Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat (JKM) is very limited, hence, the next option is through private nursing homes. However, the cost could be up to RM 2,000 a month for each person. Therefore, Long- Term Care Insurance is an alternative to fund for Long-Term Care costs as it is expected to reduce financial burden during old age. It is a risk protection mechanism for an insured that needs health and financial protection when an individual is unable to do activities of daily living (ADL) or supports in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). This paper reviews three models that have been used in pricing long-term care insurance. All three models use the equivalent principle of premium to price the insurance policy. However, the probability and assumptions used for each model differ, depending on the insured's needs and profile.

scholarly journals Improved outcome in hip fracture patients in the aging population following co-managed care compared to conventional surgical treatment: a retrospective, dual-center cohort study

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Neuerburg ◽  
Stefan Förch ◽  
Johannes Gleich ◽  
Wolfgang Böcker ◽  
Markus Gosch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Activities Of Daily Living ◽  
Trauma Care ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Aging Population ◽  
Readmission Rates ◽  
Term Outcome ◽  
Long Term Outcome

Abstract Background Hip fracture patients in the aging population frequently present with various comorbidities, whilst preservation of independency and activities of daily living can be challenging. Thus, an interdisciplinary orthogeriatric treatment of these patients has recognized a growing acceptance in the last years. As there is still limited data on the impact of this approach, the present study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcome in elderly hip fracture patients, by comparing the treatment of a hospital with integrated orthogeriatric care (OGC) with a conventional trauma care (CTC). Methods We conducted a retrospective, two-center, cohort study. In two maximum care hospitals all patients presenting with a hip fracture at the age of ≥ 70 years were consecutively assigned within a 1 year period and underwent follow-up examination 12 months after surgery. Patients treated in hospital site A were treated with an interdisciplinary orthogeriatric approach (co-managed care), patients treated in hospital B underwent conventional trauma care. Main outcome parameters were 1 year mortality, readmission rate, requirement of care (RC) and personal activities of daily living (ADL). Results A total of 436 patients were included (219 with OGC / 217 with CTC). The mean age was 83.55 (66–99) years for OGC and 83.50 (70–103) years for CTC (76.7 and 75.6% of the patients respectively were female). One year mortality rates were 22.8% (OGC) and 28.1% (CTC; p = 0.029), readmission rates were 25.7% for OGC compared to 39.7% for CTC (p = 0.014). Inconsistent data were found for activities of daily living. After 1 year, 7.8% (OGC) and 13.8% (CTC) of the patients were lost to follow-up. Conclusions Interdisciplinary orthogeriatric management revealed encouraging impact on the long-term outcome of hip fracture patients in the aging population. The observed reduction of mortality, requirements of care and readmission rates to hospital clearly support the health-economic impact of an interdisciplinary orthogeriatric care on specialized wards. Trial registration The study was approved and registered by the bavarian medical council (BLAEK: 7/11192) and the local ethics committee of munich university (Reg. No. 234–16) and was conducted as a two-center, cohort study at a hospital with integrated orthogeriatric care and a hospital with conventional trauma care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document