IV-E Waiver Cost Analysis #1 - How are IV-E Waiver dollars being - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶

Sep 30, 2022 36 likes •141 views

IV-E Waiver Cost Analysis #1 - How are IV-E Waiver dollars being spent? Goals: To track the money being allocated to each county by funding steam (e.g., EBPs vs. Family Support), to describe the goods and services provided, and to indicate

SLIDE 1

IV-E Waiver Cost Analysis

SLIDE 2

#1 - How are IV-E Waiver dollars being spent?

Goals: To track the money being allocated to each county by

funding steam (e.g., EBPs vs. Family Support), to describe the goods and services provided, and to indicate the # of clients served

How? The Evaluation Team is working with DHR to develop a

detailed spreadsheet that will be completed on a regular basis by each of the 24 Maryland jurisdictions.

SLIDE 3

#2 - How have DHR’s costs shifted with the implementation of the Waiver?

Goal: To determine whether the flexibility afforded to DHR by

the Waiver has resulted in reduced administrative costs and to evaluate whether out-of-home costs decline during the Demonstration period

How? The Evaluation Team will work with DHR to identify and

track major funding sources (e.g., Title IV-E, TANF, Title IV-B, etc.) used to pay for child welfare activities and to further break down each funding source into its cost components (e.g., administration and maintenance, training). Trends over time will be examined.

SLIDE 4

#3 – What is the net benefit/cost of implementing EBPs under the IV-Waiver?

Goal: To determine whether the costs associated with EBPs

are offset by their associated benefits, such as reduced costs associated with out-of-home placements

How? Program costs related to personnel, facilities (e.g., rent),

supplies, etc. will be collected from EBP providers on a semi- annual basis. For up to three EBPs, cost-benefit analyses will be conducted, with non-EBP youth in the same county serving as comparisons. Costs associated with non-EBP placements will be obtained from DHR.

SLIDE 5

#4 – How does implementation of EBPs affect Medicaid costs?

Goals: To assess 1) whether MA claims for were reduced for

youth following their participation in EBPs, and 2) whether MA claims for EBP participants are lower than those placed in

ut-of-home care.
How? Analyses will depend on the full implementation of

EBPs and the availability of Medicaid claims data. Analyses will be conducted in future evaluation years.

SLIDE 6

Maryland State-wide Indicators

State Fiscal Years 2013-16

SLIDE 7

State-wide Indicators

Throughout the Waiver implementation, several state-

level indicators will be monitored to assess any changes from historical trends prior to the Waiver and during Waiver implementation

The following presents rates of reunification, adoption,

and guardianship; placement stability; length of stay of removal; response track; and residential placements from SFY’s 2013-15 (pre-Waiver) and 2016 (first year of Waiver implementation)

SLIDE 8

Response Track

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% SFY 13 (N=40,595) SFY 14 (N=36,034) SFY 15 (N=31,944) SFY 16 (N=30,817) Alternative Response Investigative Response

Pre-Waiver Waiver

SLIDE 9

Other Statewide Indicators

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% SFY 13 (N=3,218) SFY 14 (N=3,016) SFY 15 (N=2,633) SFY 16 (N=2,486)

Reunification Adoption Guardianship Pre-Waiver Waiver

Exits from OOHP

4.6 4.2 4.2 4.5

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 FY13 (N=2,532) FY14 (N=2,401) FY15 (N=2,185) FY16 (N=2,480)

Moves per 1,000 Days in Care Pre-Waiver Waiver 136 130 128 132

50 100 150 200 250 FY13 (N=2,532) FY14 (N=2,401) FY15 (N=2,185) FY16 (N=2,480)

Average Days Removed Pre-Waiver Waiver 5.6% 4.4% 6.2% 6.5% 1.3% 1.5% 1.9% 1.8%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% FY13 (N=2,533) FY14 (N=2,421) FY15 (N=2,195) FY16 (N=2,491)

Community Residential Non-Community Residential

Entrie

Pre-Waiver Waiver

Rates of Reunification, Adoption, & Guardianship Placement Stability Length of Stay of Removals Residential Placements

SLIDE 10

How to Contact Us:

Bethany Lee, PhD Evaluation Director

blee@ssw.umaryland.edu

Pam Freeman, PhD Lead Evaluator for CANS-F/ Trauma

pfreeman@ssw.umaryland.edu

Elizabeth Greeno, PhD Lead Evaluator for EBPs

egreeno@ssw.umaryland.edu

John Cosgrove Senior Data Analyst

jcosgrove@ssw.umaryland.edu

Rochon Steward Research Specialist

rsteward@ssw.umaryland.edu

Maria Jose Horen Research Supervisor

mjhoren@ssw.umaryland.edu

Sara Betsinger, PhD Lead Cost Evaluator

sbetsinger@ssw.umaryland.edu

David Chen Senior Data Analyst

dchen@ssw.umaryland.edu