- ACA Implementation & State Health Reform
- Coverage and Access
- Federal/State Issues
- Medicaid and CHIP
- Population and Public Health
- Providers and Services
- Acute Care
- Assisted Living
- Behavioral Health
- Case Management
- Child Development Services
- Chronic Care Management
- Community Health Centers
- Developmental Screening
- Early Childhood Services
- Emergency Care
- EPSDT
- Family Planning
- Federally Qualified Health Centers
- Home & Community Based Services
- Hospitals
- Long Term Services & Supports
- Medical Homes & Health Homes
- Mental Health
- Nursing Homes
- Oral Health
- Preventive Care
- Primary Care
- Safety Net Providers
- Quality, Cost, and Health System Performance
- ACOs
- Adverse Event Reporting
- Care Transitions
- Comparative Effectiveness
- Cost Sharing
- Delivery System Reform
- Fraud and Abuse
- Health Care Workforce
- Health Information Technology
- Managed Care
- Medical Homes & Health Homes
- Medical Malpractice
- Patient Safety
- Payment Reform
- Performance Measurement
- Provider Payment Policy
- Quality Oversight
- Specific Populations
- Adolescents
- Childless Adults
- Children
- Children with Special Health Care Needs
- Dual Eligibles
- Elders
- Families
- Low Income People
- Parents
- People with Chronic Conditions
- People with Developmental Disabilities
- Transitional Youth
- Vulnerable Populations
- Young Adults
- Youth
- Youth in Foster Care System
- Youth in Juvenile Justice System
-
What Families Think about Cost-Sharing Policies in SCHIP
This paper reports on findings from a series of focus groups with parents of current and former SCHIP enrollees in Alabama, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New Jersey. The focus groups were designed to explore parents’ feelings about and experiences with cost sharing. The groups addressed the following topics: attitudes about paying premiums and copayments, opinions about premium and copayment amounts, and aspects of the premium payment process (such as periodicity, billing and payment methods, and penalties for late and missed payments). The focus groups were an invaluable tool in studying SCHIP, yielding nuanced, multifaceted results not attainable from surveys or analysis of enrollment data. The groups provided in-depth insight into parents’ experiences with their state SCHIP programs and the cost-sharing elements of those programs.October 2005 -
Judith A. Arnold
Ms. Arnold is the Director of the Division of Coverage and Enrollment within the Office of Health Insurance Programs in the Department of Health. In that capacity, Ms. Arnold is responsible for enrollment policy development and operations for Medicaid, Family Health Plus and Child Health Plus. She is responsible for streamlining enrollment policies and procedures to expand coverage for all those eligible, but not enrolled, in public health insurance programs. Ms. Arnold is also the SCHIP Director for New York State, a position she has held since the program’s inception. Ms. Arnold is also responsible for integrating Medicaid and CHIP into the Exchange required under the Affordable Care Act and a key participant in the Department’s work to design and build a new eligibility and enrollment system for the Exchange.
- Submitted by Admin on Thu, 07/01/2010 - 18:26
California Institute of Mental Health: The Infant, Preschool, Family, Mental Health Initiative (IPFMHI)
This site compiles the accomplishments, lessons learned, and resources developed during the multi-agency collaborative IPFMH project. The site outlines structures that can support the development of programs that identify social-emotional developmental delays and disorders, and promote access to prevention, early intervention, and treatment services for children birth to 5 years old; and recommends standards of practice for mental health services in early care and practice. Three featured resources on mental health and social-emotional screening describe the screening process, highlight program design and staffing considerations, advice on selecting among the 41 described screening instruments, introduce a series of tools for consideration when establishing a screening process, and review various strategies and resources for funding these services in California.
