Money Follows the Person

RTI is preparing a series of reports to document outcomes from the Systems Change grants. Divided into six parts, the first four provide an overview of the enduring improvements, continuing challenges, lessons learned, and recommendations of the 48 Research & Demonstration Grantees, organized by the four types of grants: CPASS, MFP, IP, & QA/QI. Part 5 provides summaries of the FTF Grants. Part 6 reviews the Respite for Adults and Children and Community-Based Treatment Alternatives for Children.

In each issue of HCBS.org NewsCLIPS we examine a topic related to home and community-based care by providing an overview of recent papers and publications. This issue of NewsCLIPS highlights Housing. Access to affordable, accessible and integrated housing is a component critical to the efficacy of home and community based services. The NCB Capital Impact team of experts helped gather examples and promising practices on affordable, community based housing options.

In 2006, Congress authorized states to add HCBS as an optional state plan benefit. Because the new benefits (referred to as 1915i) expands access, its addition to the Medicaid service menu has been welcomed by enrollees and advocates alike. This webinar will present an analysis of Medicaid’s new HCBS state plan option, which will include a discussion of the issues surrounding it, the states that have adopted it, and legislative proposals to modify it to ensure it achieves its intended purpose.

This second report in a series focuses on how state variation in level of experience and infrastructure to undertake large-scale transition programs can affect implementation. The authors describe differences in strategies to 1) expand transition coordination capacity 2) locate appropriate housing 3) enhance long-term supports & services 4) change Medicaid HCBS programs/policies to ensure that those who transition can remain in the community after the MFP eligibility period ends.

The study analyzes the long term care (LTC) system in WV and projects costs and savings associated with two models of efforts to transition people out of institutions. The system analysis looks at service delivery in both institutional and community-based settings, levels of access, financing, and quality. The appendices include examinations of care models and rebalancing efforts of other states.

In two short videos, Lana and Janet, participants in the Missouri MFP program, share their experiences moving out of nursing homes. They also discuss some program details and encourage others to sign up. The videos were produced by the Disability Resource Association to promote MFP.

The Demonstration aims to provide 75 to 100 low-income residents with rental assistance for up to 3 years as they wait for permanent housing assistance. A process map showing how a subsidy is provided, marketing materials, sample contracts, and several worksheets for gathering unit and participant information and determining assistance eligibility and amount are given here.

The presenters lead a discussion on the importance of local strategies for building affordable, accessible housing. They touch on how to identify key partners and opportunities, create a transition support network, and advocate for prioritizing housing in local programs. Examples of Money Follows the Person grantee activities are given, with a focus on Maryland’s experiences. Resources for conducting a local housing market assessment are also given.

Here are resources used to educate consumers about MN’s Consumer Directed Community Supports, Personal Care Assistance, and Road to Independence programs. The first handbook gives guidance on the processes and protections of consumer direction and also provides sample care plans and assessments. The handbook on personal care assistance is available in English, Somali and Vietnamese and reviews eligibility, management, and use of services. The last guide assists in moving out of an institution.

Money Follows the Person (MFP) programs only target 0.9% of the people that could be eligible for transitioning out of institutions each year. However, there is a potential to increase rates to 15-40% annually depending on quality of program implementation, who is targeted, and how successful states are in overcoming barriers to transitioning high-needs people. The report looks at grantee states’ potential for accomplishing this rate increase.