1 / 18

Home and Community Based Waivers for Disabled Adults: Program versus Selection Effects

Home and Community Based Waivers for Disabled Adults: Program versus Selection Effects. Courtney Harold Van Houtven Durham Veteran’s Administration Duke University Marisa Elena Domino University of North Carolina. Background.

arella
Download Presentation

Home and Community Based Waivers for Disabled Adults: Program versus Selection Effects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Home and Community Based Waivers for Disabled Adults: Program versus Selection Effects Courtney Harold Van Houtven Durham Veteran’s Administration Duke University Marisa Elena Domino University of North Carolina

  2. Background • Purpose of Waiver programs is to provide coverage for extra services to keep people in community • In-home aide services • Respite care • Adult day health care • Others • Waivers for disabled adults operate in 47 of the 50 states

  3. Background • Incentives exist for careful selection of enrollees by states • States must select persons • “At-risk” of institutionalization • Care for the person must be cost-neutral. • $2,553 to $3,360 per month for home care in NC • Hence, states have incentives to select persons partially based on expected spending levels

  4. Objective • To examine the impacts on costs of a Medicaid Home and Community-based Waiver program and whether differences are due to selection effects or true program effects, controlling for endogenous selection of persons into the program. • Expands on Anderson & Mitchell (1997, 2000) study of an AIDS Waiver program • Continuous measure of waiver participation • Multi-faceted severity measure

  5. Low likelihood High likelihood Moderate likelihood of enrollment of enrollment of enrollment Less ill More ill Severity threshold that makes a person at risk of institutionalization Study Design • There is no objective way of identifying persons truly at-risk of institutionalization • Persons with moderate severity of illness are more likely to be selected for Waiver enrollment over more severely ill individuals.

  6. Study Design • We use severity to differentiate institutional risk and expected expenditures. • Multi-faceted risk adjustment scale (CDPS) specially designed for disabled adults (Kronick, Gilmer et al., 2000). • Predictive of future health care needs and differentiates severity based on expected expenditures.

  7. Data Sources • North Carolina Medicaid claims and enrollment data from Fiscal Years 1999-2000 • Area Resource File for North Carolina for county-level information • State licensure information on home health agencies

  8. Sample • All Medicaid adults with disabled or blind status who • were continuously enrolled in Medicaid for the 2 year study period and • had at least $10,000 in expenditures in FY 1999 • N=27,056. Waiver participants=1,752

  9. Methods • Two-part expenditure models of • Total Medicaid expenditures • Nursing home expenditures • Inpatient expenditures • Key Independent variables • Percent of the year on waiver • CDPS severity • Demographics • Medicare enrollment

  10. Methods • Instrumental variables estimation controls for selection into the waiver program • Identifying instruments • Home health agencies in county • County marketing measure

  11. Descriptive Statistics * = p<.05; ** = p<.01 for a test of the equivalence of means between CAP and non-CAP samples 1. Number of observations differ depending on type of utilization

  12. Descriptive Statistics * = p<.05; ** = p<.01 for a test of the equivalence of means between CAP and non-CAP samples

  13. Descriptive Statistics

  14. Results • Endogeneity exists for total cost and nursing home cost models • Instruments are strong predictors of selection into waiver • Nursing home model includes home health agencies as only instrument

  15. Results Waiver participants face • A higher likelihood of having any Medicaid expenditures • No difference in levels of total expenditures • No difference in the likelihood of any nursing home expenditures • Significantly lower nursing home expenditures • Save $25,491 on average compared to non-participants • No difference in the likelihood of any inpatient expenditures • Slightly lower levels of expenditures • Save $2,506 on average compared to non-participants

  16. Type Low cost adult Medium cost adult High cost adult Diagnostic Categories (CDPS) None Nervous System – Low; Pulmonary –High Nervous System – Low; Pulmonary –High; Developmental Disability - Medium Predicted change in probability of total costs* -0.36 -0.12 -0.00024 Predicted change in tot. costs for avg. enrollees (both parts of model) $5,312 $6,819 $9,078 Predicted change in probability of nh costs -0.35 -0.41 -0.078 Predicted change in nh costs for avg. enrollees $725 $439 $18,102 Predicted change in prob. of inpatient costs 0.0045 0.0075 0.0055 Predicted change in inpatient costs for average enrollees * $225 $473 $302 Predictions Choosing three types of disabled adults we make predictions about cost savings. All predicted differences are the result of the difference between predictions calculated on IV models, as , probabilities are expressed on the unit interval

  17. Discussion • Participation in a Medicaid Home and Community-based Waiver leads to substantially different patterns of care • We find no savings in total expenditures but savings in nursing home and hospital inpatient expenditures for waiver participants, achieving the goals of the Home and Community Based Waiver Program.

  18. Courtney Harold Van Houtven gratefully acknowledges the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for funding (T32 HS00032). We appreciatively acknowledge the assistance of the NC Department of Health and Human Services Division of Medical Assistance. The DMA has not reviewed this report and, therefore, cannot validate the accuracy of information contained in this report. Excellent programming was provided by Josh Olinick.

More Related