Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.
search  
 
Subscribe   Subscribe   MI on Facebook Find us on Twitter Find us on Instagram      
 
 
   
 
     
 

The New York Times

 

Medicaid's Mental Health Problem

January 09, 2011

By David Gratzer

How can New York save money on Medicaid coverage of mental health while safeguarding care for those who need it?


If Governor Cuomo wants New York’s mental health Medicaid programs to be more efficient and effective, hiring a penny-pinching manager from Wisconsin isn’t the cure he’s looking for.

A better approach: if New York’s costs are too high -- and they are -- then look beyond changes in management to do what only elected officials can do: change policy. New York should reconsider its entire service model, since many cost challenges have a great deal to do with New York being New York, and very little to do with Wisconsin being Wisconsin.

Many New York health programs are still old school, with a heavy focus on provider-based financing and expensive institutional care. The state’s mental health needs are also concentrated in one of the most costly real estate and salary markets in the world, so New York’s service model spends a disproportionate share of funding on bricks, mortar and institutional management. A thoughtful plan to move more care out into the community can save millions -- and actually improve care for many patients.

As candidate Cuomo, the governor agreed that financial decisions in Medicaid were often micromanaged by politicians. But micromanagement by one bureaucrat new to New York’s system could be just as cumbersome as micromanagement from the Legislature.

I’m a psychiatrist, so I know “patient choice” isn’t a sensible approach for many mental health patients. But it can work for some. Patient-centered funding models can improve care and cut costs for many others.

For example, in 2010, New York’s Corporation on Supportive Housing argued that mental health patients who are persistently homeless cost the system a great deal as patients seek access to services in a sort of “institutional circuit.” The corporation’s argument: developing programs to target community-based services at individual patients (as opposed to funding the institutions they arrive at) can be more cost-effective. They’re right.

The only thing stopping New York from taking this approach more often is Albany’s persistent habit of micromanaging programs based on political -- or departmental -- priorities, instead of building care supports efficiently around patients, services and outcomes.

Original Source: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/01/09/medicaid-and-mental-health-how-can-fraud-be-contained/help-medicaid-patients-not-politicians

 

 
PRINTER FRIENDLY
 
LATEST FROM OUR SCHOLARS

On Obamacare's Second Birthday, Whither The HSA?
Paul Howard, 10-16-14

You Can Repeal Obamacare And Keep Kentucky's Insurance Exchange
Avik Roy, 10-15-14

Are Private Exchanges The Future Of Health Insurance?
Yevgeniy Feyman, 10-15-14

Reclaiming The American Dream IV: Reinventing Summer School
Howard Husock, 10-14-14

Don't Be Fooled, The Internet Is Already Taxed
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, 10-14-14

Bad Pension Math Is Bad News For Taxpayers
Steven Malanga, 10-14-14

Proactive Policing Is Not 'Racial Profiling'
Heather Mac Donald, 10-13-14

Smartphones: The SUVs Of The Information Superhighway
Mark P. Mills, 10-13-14

 
 
 

The Manhattan Institute, a 501(c)(3), is a think tank whose mission is to develop and disseminate new ideas
that foster greater economic choice and individual responsibility.

Copyright © 2014 Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc. All rights reserved.

52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
phone (212) 599-7000 / fax (212) 599-3494