What's New with HCFO - May 18, 2007 (Print All Articles)
The Debate Over Employment-Based Health Benefits
Since World War II, employment-based health benefits have been the most common form of health insurance for non-poor and non-elderly individuals in the United States. In 2005, 62 percent of adults below the age of 65 and 57.5 percent of children were covered by an employment-based plan.1 As health reform takes on new prominence, the efficacy of this employer-based system is being debated. There is broad disagreement on across the political spectrum over whether employer-based coverage continues to make sense. This debate is not new. The conversation about fixing the employer-based system versus replacing it entirely has been ongoing since the late 1990s. Health care costs continue to outpace inflation; consequently, debate concerning reform of the employer-based system has again turned vigorous.
In February 2007, Andrew Stern, the President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU); declared the employer-based benefit system “dead.”2 This pronouncement, from the head of the largest health care union in the country, reflects a growing frustration among employees with rising health care costs that directly affect them through higher out-of-pocket costs. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s 2006 Employer Benefit Survey, premiums have risen faster than overall inflation (3.5 percent) and wage gain (3.8 percent).3 In total, premiums have increased by 87 percent since 2000.4 Joining Stern was Lee Scott, CEO of Wal-Mart, who has partnered with Stern on forming the Better Health Care Together coalition. Wal-Mart’s partnership with SEIU—a constant critic of its business practices—demonstrates industries’ increasing concern that it cannot compete in a global economy with rising health care costs.5
While small businesses and large corporations alike have traditionally resisted any call for health care reform, many are now advocating for a new health care system, claiming the cost of employee healthcare is making it impossible to do business.6 However, there is no consensus on what this new health care system should be.7
A bill proposed by Senator Ron Wyden, crafted in conjunction with the CEO of Safeway, advocates replacing the employer-based system with an individual mandate for health insurance. People would be required to buy coverage on their own, and employers might increase wages to compensate for no longer having to purchase health insurance.8
In contrast, the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) has conducted research that indicates that the employment-based benefit system has not changed significantly since the 1980s.9 EBRI’s issue brief Employment-Based Health Benefits Access and Coverage 1998-2005, reveals that while “the percentage of workers with coverage from their own employer dropped from 68.4 percent in 1988 to 61.4 percent in 2005, the percentage of workers without health insurance throughout most of these years was in large part unchanged.”10 This research also suggests that a confluence of a strong economy, falling health care costs, and low unemployment might be creating the beginning of a drive for an expansion of employment-based coverage.11
Many businesses are promoting modifications to the employer-based system rather than a full-scale replacement. Alain C. Enthoven and Victor R. Fuchs report in “Employment-Based Health Insurance: Past, Present, and Future,” that there are several plausible scenarios for job-based insurance to flourish. The most likely scenario for this would be the enactment of employer mandates by many large states or the federal government.12 Additionally, individual mandates, where people could purchase their insurance through their employers, represents another possibility for continuing the employer-based system. For example, costs to individuals could be mitigated through employer-sponsored Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), High Deductible Health Accounts, and other tax-sheltered plans.
The Changes in Health Care Financing and Organization (HCFO) initiative has funded research on a variety of studies that examine employment-based health benefits; the studies’ results inform debate on all aspects of employer-based coverage and future policy. Daniel Polsky and colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania investigated health plan choices and adverse selection in employer-sponsored health insurance. Polsky concluded that the type of health plan coverage an employer offers affects whether its employees take-up insurance, but has a smaller effect on overall coverage rates for workers and their families because of the availability of alternative sources of coverage.13 Additionally, Polsky found no evidence that HMO plans attract a disproportionate share of low-risk enrollees. Practically, this indicates that there may be little need for employers to risk adjust insurance premiums or otherwise restrict employee choice of plan types.14
In another HCFO funded study, Anthony Lo Sasso and Bruce Meyer at Northwestern University examined the effect of Medicaid and uncompensated care provided by clinics and hospitals on insurance coverage. Their results provide mixed evidence on the extent of crowd-out. According to Lo Sasso and Meyer, hospital care appears to have little crowd-out effect, but clinic care does substantially crowd out private coverage in some circumstances.
Joel Cantor and colleagues at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, examined trends in enrollment in New Jersey’s Individual Health Coverage Program (IHCP), implemented in 1993. Two key components of the IHCP were pure community rating and guaranteed issue/renewal of coverage. Despite positive early evaluations, Cantor found through his HCFO-funded study that the program’s stability was fragile. He also concluded that, even as opportunities increased for job-related insurance coverage, the IHCP retained its high-risk enrollees.
These three grants are only a sample of the research that HCFO has funded in this area. A listing of other HCFO work relating to employer-based coverage follows:
Title: Sustaining Individual Health Insurance Markets Under Community Rating and Open Enrollment
Institution: Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Grant Period: April 2002 – September 2003
Principal Investigator: Joel Cantor, Sc.D.
What is the extent of risk selection in New Jersey’s Individual Health Coverage Program (IHCP), which was implemented in 1992 as part of the state’s individual market reforms? What are the policy options for sustaining access to individual health plans and describe the role of the non-group coverage in New Jersey’s health care insurance market? Using data from The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation-funded New Jersey Family Health Survey (NJFHS), the researchers aimed to answer the following questions: (1) How has the distribution of risk changed in the IHCP since 1995-6 and what are the implications of those changes for the viability of community rating and related reforms? (2) What is the potential impact on current or potential IHCP enrollees of adopting modified community rating? and (3) What role does the IHCP play in the continuum of coverage in New Jersey? The objective of this study was to analyze changes in New Jersey’s individual insurance market to inform state policymakers considering reforms to make non-group markets accessible and viable. The researchers supplemented the NJFHS data with a sample of 600 non-group subscribers (subscriber lists provided by top 4 or 5 carriers in state who cover 95% of lives in the individual market). Using the same methodological approach utilized by Swartz and Garnick in the early years of the IHCP, they assessed the risk of medical expenditures of adult IHCP enrollees compared to that of a contrast population comprised of individuals with non-small-group employment-based insurance. They also compared the IHCP enrollees with the entire employer-group market and the uninsured.
Title: Health Plan Choices and Adverse Selection in Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance
Institution: University of Pennsylvania
Grant Period: February 2002 - June 2003
Principal Investigator: Daniel E. Polsky, Ph.D.
Are HMOs able to offer lower premiums because of favorable risk selection or utilization savings? What is the relationship between health plan choices and risk selection? Using Round I CTS Household Survey (CTSHS) data to study the effect of risk selection in employer-sponsored health plans, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania found that lower HMO premiums could not be explained by favorable selection, nor was utilization lower for HMOs. The researchers applied their methodology from the earlier study and analyzed Round II CTSHS data. The researchers examined the influence an individual’s health risk has on his/her selection of an employer and whether employers choose their type of insurance based on the unmeasured health or health care utilization of their employees. As both the public and the private sector combat risk selection, this study sheds light on how risk selection affects health plan choice
Title: Studies of the Working Uninsured, Their Dependents and Insurance Reform on Their Behalf
Institution: The Urban Institute
Grant Period: June 2000 - July 2002
Principal Investigator: Linda J. Blumberg, Ph.D.
What are the effects of certain insurance market reforms that were designed to expand coverage? Researchers at the Urban Institute conducted several analyses looking at the working uninsured and these effects using the Current Population Survey (CPS), the National Survey of America’s Families (NSAF), and the National Health Interview Survey. In particular, they aimed to answer the following five questions: 1) Who are the working uninsured? 2) Why do employer-sponsored coverage rates vary across the 50 states? 3) Have health insurance market reforms affected the composition of insured risk pools? 4) Did HIPAA have any effect in the small group market? and 5) Why do so many workers in large firms lack health insurance? The objective of this series of studies was to provide a better understanding of the working uninsured in order to better inform the policy debate about coverage expansions and identify those interventions most likely to work.
Title: Business Views of Strengths and Weaknesses of the Employer-Based System for Providing Health Insurance Coverage
Institution: Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI)
Grant Period: April 2000 - June 2001
Principal Investigator: Jack A. Meyer, Ph.D
What role do employers play in financing health care coverage? Researchers at the Economic and Social Research Institute first conducted a literature review of writings and research on the employer-based system, which included a review of new designs for the U.S. health care system made by scholars across a broad array of organizations, as well as a review of major national surveys conducted by RAND, the federal government, and others. The literature (and proposals for redesign) on employer financing and contribution policies were also reviewed. The results of the literature review was then used to outline the kinds of issues to address in the employer interview component of the study. The researchers conducted in-depth interviews with 50 to 60 employers to elicit information on what business leaders see as the essential ingredients for reforming the employer based system. They examined questions aimed at understanding how employers view the employer-based system, what problems it creates for them, and how they would respond to a variety of proposals to reform the system, including some that would eliminate the employer’s role. The objectives of the project were to provide policymakers with better information about the strengths and weaknesses of the employer-based system, as well as the implications for the future direction of reform, focusing on whether to repair the current system or replace it with an alternative design.
Title: Early Implementation Experience of Companies Offering internet-based Models for Employer Health Benefits
Institution: University of Minnesota
Grant Period: October 2000 - November 2001
Principal Investigator: Jon B. Christianson, Ph.D.
What is the impact of internet direct contracting (IDC) systems? In this first phase of the project, the researchers at the University of Minnesota contrasted the approach used by Vivius, Inc. with other internet-enabled models directed at the employer/employee health insurance market and tracked the implementation over the first eight months. A second evaluation phase followed. The researchers also endeavored to answer a number of practical questions that arose with the introduction of IDC models in response to a defined contribution model of health care delivery and financing. Their objective was to inform private and public policymakers on the implications of implementing an IDC model and the interactions between such a model and the market as a whole.
Title: The Transformation of Corporate Health Care Purchasing Institution: The Transformation of Corporate Health Care Purchasing
Grant Period: October 1998 - May 2001
Principal Investigator: James Maxwell, Ph.D.
How widespread are innovations in health care purchasing by large employers? The researchers built on their prior study of fourteen large U.S. companies to develop a better understanding of how and by whom health care is purchased within large, Fortune 500, firms. The study focused on the use of procurement practices such as competitive bidding, benchmarking and quality standards as well as on the organizational arrangements used to implement them. The objective of this project was to identify "best practices" among the companies and analyze the consequences and implications of changes in practice for firms, employers, and public policy.
Title: Controlling Risk Segmentation under Employment-based Medical Savings Accounts
Institution: University of Pennsylvania
Grant Period: April 1997 - October 1998
Principal Investigator: Mark V. Pauly, Ph.D.
How do employers decide whether to offer medical savings accounts (MSAs) to their employees? Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School addressed the question of how employers in medium- and large-group firms think about MSA-induced risk segmentation in the health insurance market. They: 1) conducted a simulation analysis under different levels of premium reduction or employer contribution to the MSA account to analyze the financial impact of these different thresholds; and 2) surveyed employee benefit specialists and consultants and ask them whether, under various "realistic circumstances," they would choose to offer MSAs as an option and whether they would adjust the premium reduction/employer contribution to control the amount of risk segmentation. The objective of the study was to help inform the policy debate as to how medium and large-group employers say they would implement MSAs under various conditions.
Title: Evaluating the Use of Performance-Related Information and Financial Incentives in Employer Health Care Purchasing
Institution: Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI)
Grant Period: January 1997 – March 1999
Principal Investigator: Jack A. Meyer, Ph.D
Are voluntary, employer-based purchasing coalitions an effective means of controlling health care costs while maintaining quality of care? Researchers at the Economic and Social Research Institute evaluated the effects of health care purchasing coalitions on health care costs, utilization, and quality. This grant supported the first two phases of what is likely to be a three phase project, including: 1) a process evaluation; 2) an assessment of intermediate outcomes; and 3) a quantitative impact evaluation. During phase one, the researchers assessed the purchasing activities of six coalitions across the country, including how they have been implemented, and how they compare to past purchasing practices. The objective of this research was to give employers and policymakers more information on the effectiveness of community-based efforts of business coalitions and individual companies to reform the way health care is purchased.
Title: Changes in Employer-Offered Health Insurance: Firms Decision Making & Employee Satisfaction
Institution: University of Pittsburgh
Grant Period: September 1996 - August 1999
Principal Investigator: Judith R. Lave, Ph.D.
How are changes in the health insurance environment affecting the health insurance benefits that employers offer, and how are these changes in insurance offerings affecting employee satisfaction? The goals of the project were to 1) describe the health benefit offerings, and how they have changed, for the 50 largest employers in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area; 2) investigate the decision-making process firms use to select and refine their health insurance offerings; 3) assess the extent to which the changes are influenced by selected firm and environmental characteristics; 4) determine consumer satisfaction with employer-offered health insurance following changes in offerings; and 5) assess and explain consumer selection of insurance plans. The study surveyed large employers (more than 200 employees) in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area. The researchers also conducted structured interviews with benefits officers or union officials. The objective of the study was to help policymakers understand and predict how changes in the marketplace will affect what health insurance employers offer, how satisfied employees will be with the new offerings, and to what extent employers are really acting as "agents" of their employees.
Title: Developing Risk Assessment Tools for Large Employers and Testing Risk Adjustment Approaches in Health Care Purchasing
Institution: Pacific Business Group on Health (PBGH)
Grant Period: June 1993 - November 1996
Principal Investigator: Patricia E. Powers
Can purchasers use one of two advanced risk assessment models for determining which health plans are most efficient, for negotiating individually and collectively with plans for better premiums, and for employers offering multiple plans, establishing their contributions to each plan based on the premium for the most efficient plan? The Pacific Business Group on Health (PBGH) 1) tested and refined two different practical methods for assessing the relative risk of enrollees in different companies offering a variety of managed health plans; and 2) applied these methods to several employer members of the PBGH. One method used self-reported health status data and the other used socioeconomic data abstracted from employees personnel files. Testing these risk adjustment tools with large employers provided public and private policymakers with information vital to understanding the implications of using such tools.
Title: The Rise in Employer Health Care Costs -- Phase 2
Institution: University of California-Irvine
Grant Period: November 1991 - December 1994
Principal Investigator: Paul J. Feldstein, Ph.D.
What factors have contributed to the rise in employer health care costs, and how can this information be used to design improved benefit packages and more effective cost containment policies? The second phase of this study, included three main types of analyses: 1) descriptive and multivariate analyses to examine changes in employee health expenditures and benefit-premium ratios, the factors contributing to the changes, and how these factors differ across firms; 2) an analysis of groups whose policies have been canceled, in order to identify factors that affect the likelihood of cancellation; and 3) a patient-level analysis comparing utilization of groups with high expenditure growth rates and groups experiencing low growth rates.
Title: The Rise in Employer Health Care Costs -- Phase 1
Institution: University of California-Irvine
Grant Period: August 1990 - October 1991
Principal Investigator: Paul J. Feldstein, Ph.D.
Why have employer health care costs increased so dramatically over the past few years? The University of California, Irvine conducted the first phase of a study to determine the extent to which various factors, including medical price increases, technology advances, employee and retiree demographics, and changes in employee benefit plans, contributed to the rise in employer costs from 1984-1990, and to estimate the effect of changes in benefit design on employee utilization and expenditures. During phase one, the project expanded an existing database to include premium, expenditure, and utilization data on over 150 insured employed groups and conducted preliminary multivariate analysis of this data.
1 Fronstin, P. “Employment-Based Health Benefits: Access and Coverage, 1988-2005,” Employee Benefit Research Institute Issue Brief #303, March 2007, p. 1.
2 Service Employees International Union, “SEIU Partnership to Spur Effort To Fix Health Care in America,” www.seiu.org/media/health_partnership.cfm.
3 Kaiser Family Foundation, “Employer Health Benefits 2006 Annual Survey,” p. 1, ex. A. Also see www.kff.org/insurance/7527/index.cfm.
4 ibid.
5 Kaiser Family Foundation, Daily Health Policy Report ,“Wal-Mart, SEIU Outline Themes to Meet Health Coverage Goal by 2012,” February 8, 2007. Also see www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?hint=38-DR_ID=42811.
6 Freudenheim, M. “New Urgency in Debating Health Care,” New York Times, April 6, 2007.
7 ibid.
8 Cohn, J. “What’s the One Thing Big Business and the Left Have in Common?,” New York Times Magazine, April 1, 2007.
9 Fronstin, P. “Employment-Based Health Benefits: Access and Coverage, 1988-2005,” Employee Benefit Research Institute Issue Brief #303, March 2005, p.1.
10 ibid, at p. 21.
11 ibid, at p. 4.
12 Enthoven, A and V. Fuchs, “Employment-Based Health Insurance: Past, Present, and Future,” Health Affairs, Vol. 25, No. 6, November/December 2006, p. 1538-1547.
13 Polsky, D. et.al. “Employer Health Insurance Offerings and Employee Enrollment Decisions.” Health Services Research, Vol. 40, No. 5 p1, October 2005.
14 Polsky, D., and S. Nicholson, “Why are Managed Care Plans Less Expensive: Risk Selection, Utilization, or Reimbursement?,” Journal of Risk and Insurance, Vol. 7, No. 1, March 2004, p. 21-40.
Grantee Spotlight - Jack Meyer, Ph.D.
Jack Meyer, Ph.D. is a principal at Health Management Associates, a research and consulting organization specializing in the fields of health care program development, health economics and finance, program evaluation and data analysis. His research primarily focuses on policy reforms to extend health coverage to the uninsured, improving access to health care for vulnerable populations, pay-for-performance, and hospital quality improvements. Dr. Meyer is also a Visiting Professor at the University of Maryland, where he teaches a course on health policy.
Dr. Meyer received his Ph.D. and M.A. in economics from Ohio State University and his B.A. from the University of Michigan. He is the founder and past president of the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), a non-profit, non-partisan research and policy center that specialized in health care and the reform of social services. Prior to forming ESRI, Dr. Meyer was the Director of Health Policy Research and a Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute where he conducted studies related to the financing and delivery of health care services. Specifically, he evaluated new cost management initiatives in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and studied long-term care policy options and business health cost management initiatives. Dr. Meyer has also worked as the Assistant Director of the U.S. Council on Wage and Price Stability, where he was responsible for monitoring wage and price trends in the private sector of the economy. Additionally, Dr. Meyer has held positions with the U.S. Department of Labor and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Dr. Meyer is the author of numerous books and publications on health care financing, long term care, and labor issues and has led several HCFO funded studies. His most recent HCFO-related work examined business views on the employer-based health care system. This was a two part project. The researchers first conducted a literature review of writings and research on the employer-based system. This review included an examination of new designs for the U.S. health care system made by scholars from various organizations, as well as a review of major national surveys conducted by RAND, the federal government, and others. The results of the literature review were then used to formulate the employer interview component of the study. The researchers conducted in-depth interviews with 56 employers to elicit information on what business leaders see as the essential ingredients for reforming the employer-based system. The researchers interviewed roughly an equal number of employers from four firm size categories: very small firms (2 to 15 full time workers), small firms (20 to 70 workers), mid- sized firms (100 to 500 workers), and large firms (900 or more workers). The interviewees were companies from all geographic regions and from a variety of industries.
The researchers examined questions aimed at understanding how employers view the employer-based system, what problems it creates for them, and how they would respond to a variety of proposals to reform the system, including some that would eliminate the employer’s role. Meyer notes that “throughout our interviews with employers, we detected notable dissatisfaction with many aspects of the current health care system and strong desire for reform. Yet the respondents generally favored incremental policy reforms to expand coverage to the uninsured and contain costs rather than a restructuring of the current employment-based system or mandatory participation in that system.”1
For more information on Dr. Meyer’s work, visit www.esresearch.org or the Health Management Associates Web site.
1 Silow-Carroll, S. et al., “The State of Employment-Based Health Coverage and Business Attitudes About Its Future,” Economic and Social Research Institute, April 2001.
Spotlight on Grantee Publication
Susan H. Busch, Ph.D., associate professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Yale University School of Medicine, co-authored an article titled, “Do State Parity Laws Reduce the Financial Burden on Families of Children with Mental Health Care Needs?” that appears in the June 2007 issue of the Health Services Research. The article describes HCFO-sponsored research examining the financial impact of state parity laws on families of children requiring mental health services.
Current HCFO grantee publications and recent grant findings will be regularly featured in the results section http://www.hcfo.net/results.htm of our Web site.
This Month in the News
Findings from a project led by Richard Johnson, Ph.D., were highlighted in a recent article on Ascribe Newswire. The article features a recently released report from Johnson and colleagues at The Urban Institute, showing “how changes in disability levels, financial resources, [long-term care recipients'] adult children's availability, and other factors will affect the demand for paid and unpaid long-term care services.”
Robert Lowe, M.D., M.P.H, a co-investigator on a project at the Office of Oregon Health Policy and Research, will be presenting findings from the project on May 16, 2007 at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Annual Meeting in Chicago, Illinois.
Job Opportunities at AcademyHealth
National Program Director
AcademyHealth is currently seeking a National Program Director for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's State Coverage Initiative (SCI) program. SCI assists state policy makers in expanding health insurance coverage through grant making, technical assistance, workshops and disseminating information on best practices. The SCI program is administered by AcademyHealth, and the Director will serve as a senior member of the AcademyHealth management team. The Director will work closely with Foundation staff to create SCI's annual work plan, designed to maximize assistance provided to state policy makers towards coverage initiatives. The Director will be responsible for implementing the work plan and managing a staff of 5 and several senior consultants. Candidates should have a masters degree in a field such as public administration, public policy, or public health, and a minimum of 10 years experience in areas related to health policy, a significant portion as a state policy maker.
HCFO Research Assistant
AcademyHealth is currently seeking a Research Assistant to assist with major programs and projects. In particular, the incumbent would provide staff support for the Research, Policy and Dissemination Team’s Changes in Health Care Financing and Organization (HCFO) initiative, a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation-sponsored program. This program supports the research community by funding research that examines major changes in health care financing, its effects on costs, access and quality, and the public health system. It also bridges the gap between research and policy by translating findings and disseminating them to appropriate stakeholders. The Research Assistant would assist with a variety of substantive and administrative tasks to support HCFO’s grantmaking, convening and dissemination activities, and assist in the development of policy and research syntheses. In addition, the incumbent would provide support to other activities of AcademyHealth, including its work on long-term care, public health, and other projects as necessary.
Methods Intern
AcademyHealth is currently seeking an organized and motivated research assistant for the summer to support the development of a comprehensive glossary of methodological terms used in the field of health services research. Responsibilities include: compiling definitions, equations, examples and figures for the glossary, as appropriate; conducting literature reviews for key methodological terms; and providing written summaries of the literature and data elements. Applicants should be in the process of completing a masters' degree or at least in their third year of undergraduate studies. The ideal candidate should be familiar with quantitative notation, have a working knowledge of word processing programs, and be proficient in Excel or another database program. Interest in health care and health policy is a plus. The internship is paid and is available for full-time employment over the summer with the potential for part-time work in the fall.
For more information, please visit www.academyhealth.org/about/employment.htm.
Interested candidates can send cover letter and resume to jobs@academyhealth.com.
New Medication Data Available From the National Nursing Home Survey
The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) announces the release of a microdata file and documentation containing nationally representative data on medications administered to nursing home residents. The National Nursing Home Survey (NNHS) is a periodic survey providing data on nursing homes, nursing home residents, and their care. The 2004 NNHS collected medication data on sampled nursing home residents for the first time in the survey’s history.
Potential uses of these data for nursing home policy and research include providing national estimates of medication use and therapeutic class use and evaluating related patient safety issues. In 2004, the therapeutic drug class most commonly administered to nursing home residents was “metabolic/nutrient” agents.
Medication data were obtained by interview of a designated respondent from each facility. Respondents were asked to review the medication administration records of each sampled resident. Data were collected on up to 25 medications per resident taken the day before the facility interview, and on medications taken regularly but not the day before the interview. The medication file can be linked with the NNHS resident file to examine the resident characteristics associated with the use of medication and therapeutic classes. Data are available for 13,507 residents sampled across 1,174 facilities.
For medication and other 2004 NNHS data files and documentation see: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nnhs.htm.
The NNHS is one of a family of surveys known collectively as the National Health Care Surveys. For more information on the long term care, inpatient care, ambulatory surgery, and ambulatory medical care components of the National Health Care Surveys, please visit www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhcs.htm.
Public Health Systems Research CyberSeminar: Regionalizing Public Health Systems
May 23, 2:00-3:30 p.m. EDT
This web-based seminar will provide an overview of regionalization in public health systems, give examples of regionalization's implementation, highlight new research findings in this area, and address challenges faced when institutionalizing this approach. Registration is required and closes May 22.
Moderator:
Harold Cox, M.S.S.W., Boston University
Panelists:
Patrick Lenihan, Ph.D., University of Illinois at Chicago
David Palm, Ph.D., Nebraska Department of Health & Human Services
Michael Stoto, Ph.D., Georgetown University
Building Bridges: Making a Difference in Long-Term Care
2007 Colloquium
Saturday, June 2
Orlando, FL
Join The Commonwealth Fund and AcademyHealth on Saturday, June 2 in Orlando for the fourth Building Bridges: Making a Difference in Long-Term Care Colloquium. This event is part of a strategic initiative that brings together policy leaders, providers, consumer advocates, researchers, and funders around critical issues in long-term care. This is a unique opportunity for stakeholders to exchange information, debate the issues, seek solutions, and identify where additional research is needed.
The 2007 Colloquium will focus on two issues:
Conflicting Incentives for Long-term Care: Medicare and Medicaid
David Grabowski, Ph. D., at Harvard Medical School’s Department of Health Care Policy will prepare a background paper and explore the conflicting incentives within the Medicare and Medicaid programs concerning the provision and financing of long-term care, as well as the implications of those incentives for quality, financing, and policy. Grabowski will synthesize what is known, develop a research agenda, and identify methodological concerns and obstacles to building an evidence base to inform the policy debate.
Consumer Preparedness for Long-term Care
This year’s colloquium will feature a new forum format designed to stimulate discussion among an expert panel and colloquium participants. The goal of this facilitated discussion will be to engage the dynamic panel in a discussion of issues related to long-term care planning. In addition, the facilitator will elicit the experts’ and colloquium participants’ sense of which issues were most important to policymakers and practitioners, as well as where research efforts should be focused. Following the colloquium, AcademyHealth will prepare an issue brief synthesizing the discussion and outlining research and policy agendas.
The meeting will be held on Saturday, June 2 from 8:30 a.m. until 4 p.m, in conjunction with AcademyHealth's Annual Research Meeting in Orlando, FL.
For more information on AcademyHealth and The Commonwealth Fund, see www.academyhealth.org and www.cmwf.org.
Inquiries can be directed to Christal Stone at 202.292.6765 or ltc@academyhealth.org.
The Sixth Public Health Systems Research (PHSR) Meeting: Building an Evidence Base for the Public Health System
The PHSR IG will hold its annual meeting on June 2 from 12 pm-6 pm, in conjunction with the 2007 ARM. Consider attending this meeting to learn about new findings in PHSR, hear an update from CDC, and network with other researchers in this field.
For more information on this meeting, please visit the Interest Group meeting Web site.
This meeting is sponsored by Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
You do not need to register for the ARM to attend this meeting. Please visit the PHSR IG webpage for more information.
Health Law Research Methods Course
June 25-26, AcademyHealth Office, Washington, DC
AcademyHealth, in collaboration with The George Washington University's Department of Health Policy, will host a two-day workshop designed to introduce health services researchers to the role of law in health policy-related research. Sessions will be led by Sara Rosenbaum, J.D., Hirsh Professor and Chair of George Washington University's Department of Health Policy, and additional faculty of the university's Department of Health Policy, Hirsh Health Law and Policy Program, and invited lecturers. Participants will learn essential tools and methods needed to understand the impact of law on health and health care. Certificates of completion will be provided.
Registration closes May 25 – additional information and online registration are available on our Web site.
HSR Impact Award - Call for Nominations
Deadline: Tuesday, July 31, 2007
AcademyHealth requests nominations for its third annual HSR Impact Award, which recognizes outstanding research that has been successfully translated into health policy, management, or clinical practice and, as a result, had a positive impact on health and health care.
The winner receives:
* $2,000 and complimentary registration and travel to the 2008 National Health Policy Conference where the award will be presented; and
* Publication as part of the AcademyHealth "HSR Impact" series.
For more information about the award, including eligibility criteria and the application process, visit our Web site or contact Jennifer Muldoon at 202.292.6700.
International Health Study Tours – Germany
October 13-19, 2007
Registration Opens May 23
AcademyHealth is pleased to offer a unique opportunity to build collaborative relationships among health services researchers and policymakers from countries with shared health policy challenges. Please join us and facilitator Uwe Reinhardt, Ph.D. of Princeton University, in Germany, Oct. 13-19 to learn about Germany's social health insurance system, including recent reforms, the impact of mandated public reporting of hospital quality, and the challenges of implementing disease management at a national level. Tour information is available on our Web site. Registration opens May 23.