Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorO'Connor, Kevin
dc.contributor.authorVolpe, Fred J.
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-07T18:09:16Z
dc.date.available2021-09-07T18:09:16Z
dc.date.issued1980-04-01
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12648/2649
dc.description.abstractTwo arguments, one for full Federal funding and one for a continuance of state - Federal funding of long term care, are made in this chapter. Both arguments have one important area of agreement; they both set forth cost containment as a primary objective of any funding scheme. Furthermore, both suggest that this can best be achieved through some form of prospective reimbursement. Under the present system of retrospective reimbursement Medicaid pays, without limit, for all eligible services provided. This, many believe, encourages the provision of unnecessary services which results in an unnatural escalation of costs. Prospective reimbursement simply means forecasting service needs for some future period (usually one year) and then determining how much will be paid for those services. This would establish a limit or "cap" on Medicaid expenditures which would presumably have the effect of containing run-away costs.
dc.subjectPublic Administration
dc.subjectThe College At Brockport
dc.subjectLong Term Care
dc.subjectFederal Funding
dc.subjectMedicaid
dc.subjectNursing Homes
dc.title08. The Financing of Long Term Care
dc.typechapter
refterms.dateFOA2021-09-07T18:09:16Z
dc.description.institutionSUNY Brockport
dc.source.statuspublished
dc.description.publicationtitlePublic Administration Manuscripts
dc.contributor.organizationThe College at Brockport
dc.languate.isoen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
pad_manuscript/8/fulltext (1).pdf
Size:
2.251Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record