How The Affordable Care Act Can Help Move States Toward A High-Performing System Of Long-Term Services And Supports

2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 447-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan C. Reinhard ◽  
Enid Kassner ◽  
Ari Houser
2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-66
Author(s):  
Caldwell Joe ◽  
J. Alston Reginald

The Affordable Care Act includes many new provisions for long-term services and supports (LTSS). Among these are several new options, improvements, and incentives within Medicaid to balance service systems and expand access to home and community-based services. In addition, the Affordable Care Act authorizes the establishment of a new voluntary national long-term care insurance program, the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) Program. This article discusses some of the major provisions and implementation. It also examines how the major principles of rehabilitation counseling are central to advancing LTSS policy and how rehabilitation counselors can play a key role in ensuring quality LTSS services for persons with disabilities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 717-717
Author(s):  
Edward Miller ◽  
Pamela Nadash ◽  
Marc Cohen

Abstract This presentation documents the continuing failure to tackle the problem of financing long-term services and supports (LTSS)—a failure most recently seen in the only national legislation ever enacted to comprehensively address LTSS costs: the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) Act. The CLASS Act was included in the Affordable Care Act, but was repealed in 2013. Subsequently, policy experts and some Democrats have made proposals for addressing the LTSS financing crisis. Moreover, significant government action is taking place at the state level, both to relieve financial and emotional burdens on LTSS recipients and their families and to ease pressure on state budgets. Lessons from these initiatives could serve as opportunities for learning how to overcome roadblocks to successful policy development, adoption, and implementation across states and for traversing the policy and political tradeoffs should a policy window open once again for addressing the problem of LTSS financing nationally.


The Forum ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert P. Saldin

AbstractLong-term care is a serious but largely unrecognized problem in the US. The CLASS Act was a new program embedded within the Affordable Care Act that was supposed to bring relief to disabled individuals and Medicaid, the primary payer for long-term care. However, the program had an unworkable design, and it was eventually abandoned by the Obama administration. CLASS’ flaws were largely the product of a policy area in which ignorance and misinformation render any effective and fiscally sound program politically unfeasible. As such, the rise and fall of the CLASS Act highlights the profound challenges facing any attempt to pass serious long-term care reform and underscores the need to raise awareness of America’s long-term care challenge.


Author(s):  
Victoria Walker ◽  
Morgan Ruley ◽  
Laikyn Nelson ◽  
Whitney Layton ◽  
Alberto Coustasse

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2182-2182
Author(s):  
Mark A. Fiala ◽  
Jin Huang ◽  
Mary E. Hartman

Background and Purpose: Childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) face a number of long-term physical and psychosocial challenges into adulthood. Prior to implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), cancer was deemed a "pre-existing condition" which often excluded CCSs from obtaining insurance or drastically increased the cost to do so. As a result, CCSs were more likely to report healthcare affordability issues which lead to many delaying or skipping needed healthcare. The ACA included a provision which prohibited discrimination based on pre-existing conditions which went into effect in January 2014. Following implementation, the rate of uninsured CCSs has decreased nearly 40%; however, it is unclear if healthcare affordability remains an issue among this group. Methods: Data from the National Heath Information Survey (NHIS) was used to compare the self-reported affordability of healthcare between CCS and non-cancer adults. The analysis was limited to those 21-65 at time of survey as older adults are eligible for Medicare and would have been less impacted by the provision. CCSs were matched 1:3 to non-cancer controls based on demographics. A difference-in-differences analysis was used to compare the pre- (2011-2013) and post-ACA (2015-2017) changes on healthcare affordability between CCS and non-cancer adults, adjusting for demographics. Results: There were 309 CCSs identified in the 2011-2013 cohort and 324 in the 2015-2017 cohort. The two cohorts were similar in demographic composition. The median age was 36 and 40, respectively, and both were predominantly white and female. These were matched to cohorts of 927 and 972 non-cancer controls, respectively. In the 2011-2013 cohort, 24% of CCS reported being uninsured; 45% had private coverage, 15% Medicaid, 11% Medicare, and 5% had other insurance or were unreported. 45% of CCSs reported difficulty paying for healthcare and 28% and 25%, respectively, reported delaying and skipping needed care due to costs. Compared to non-cancer controls, CCSs were 39% more likely to be uninsured after controlling for other factors (p = 0.046). CCSs were also 191% more likely to report difficulty paying for healthcare, 131% more likely to report delaying and 194% more likely to report skipping needed healthcare due to costs (all p < 0.001). In the 2015-2017 cohort, 13% of CCS reported being uninsured; 49% had private coverage, 23% Medicaid, 12% Medicare, and 3% had another insurance or insurance status was unknown. 36% of CCSs reported difficulty paying for healthcare and 21% and 14%, respectively, reported delaying and skipping needed care due to costs. CCSs were not more likely than the non-cancer controls to be uninsured after controlling for other factors (p = 0.313). However, CCSs were 130% more likely to report difficulty paying for healthcare (p < 0.001), 88% more likely to report delaying (p < 0.001) and 72% more likely to report skipping needed healthcare due to costs (p = 0.008). The difference-in-difference analysis suggested skipping needed care was the only indicator of disparity measured that improved statistically post-ACA. In respect to non-cancer controls, the disparity in skipping needed care was reduced by 63% (p = 0.040). Conclusions and Implications: Following implementation of the ACA, a smaller proportion of CCSs report being uninsured. Medicaid expansion, which also occurred as part of the ACA in many states, may have contributed more to the improving uninsured rates than elimination of the pre-existing condition clause. Despite the improvements, CCSs still face disparate challenges in paying for healthcare. CCSs are at greater risk for chronic health conditions, have higher out-of-pocket medical costs, and lower average incomes than their peers, all which likely contribute to the disparity. Disclosures Fiala: Incyte: Research Funding.


2019 ◽  
Vol 243 ◽  
pp. 488-495
Author(s):  
Kirstin E. Acus ◽  
Divya L. Indrakanti ◽  
Jon L. Miller ◽  
Priti P. Parikh ◽  
Thomas G. Cheslik ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document