Posts
Accountable Health Community Models: What’s the State Role?
/in Policy Blogs Accountable Health, Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, Health Equity, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health /by Lesa RairWith growing recognition that the health care delivery system alone cannot improve population health, there is increasing movement at the state and local levels to create new relationships between systems that focus on traditional health care delivery and those that extend to work, housing, family, and community life.
CMMI recently announced an initiative to test whether an Accountable Health Community model that systematically identifies health-related social needs and connects beneficiaries to services can impact total health care costs, overall health, and quality of care. Although focused at the local level, applicants are required to partner with state Medicaid agencies. This relationship makes sense, as states focus payment and delivery reforms on improving care, reducing costs, and improving health by implementing global or bundled payments and shared savings that provide opportunities for communities to channel resources in new directions (e.g. housing supports, food security).
States can participate in such initiatives by providing flexible funding through value-based payments, data sharing arrangements and expertise. State policymakers, who set policies and develop programs related to housing, transportation, safety, education, economic development, public health, and health care delivery, have significant opportunities to set policies that foster health.
Indeed, some states (California, Colorado, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington state to name a few) are actively promoting or exploring models to integrate public health, social services, and delivery and payment systems, and are developing partnerships needed to make these strategies successful. Sometimes referred to as Accountable Communities for Health, these new models are intended to create community environments that promote health and well-being.
These states are aligning Medicaid delivery system reform efforts with prevention agendas, providing financial incentives to address social needs, developing requirements for provider networks to partner with community organizations and consumers to address locally identified priorities, and creating synergy among programs. They are integrating Community Health Workers (CHWs) into evolving health care systems to facilitate care coordination and enhance access to community-based services.
Some of these initiatives are just getting off the ground, and others already have early results. Oregon, for instance, set up a community prevention grant program that requires joint applications between Coordinated Care Organizations (CCOs) and local public health departments to address community needs identified through local needs assessments. They must address both community and health system interventions. Preliminary results are already available; for example, opiate prevention programs report 877 opiate overdose reversals from community members receiving naloxone and a 29% decrease in heroin-related deaths.
As new models are tested through local innovation, engaging states is equally important in order to ensure an adequate infrastructure that can support sustainability and bring innovative local initiatives to scale to benefit residents no matter where in the state they live. States have opportunities to reach beyond traditional health care system reform initiatives to use their policy levers and system changes to address social determinants of health and strengthen the capacity of communities to create health. To assist state policymakers seeking to maximize their leverage, NASHP has compiled a table of funding sources that state agencies use to address social determinants. Stay tuned as NASHP tracks state-level initiatives that explore and promote ACH developments.
Improving Behavioral Health Access & Integration Using Telehealth & Teleconsultation: A Health Care System for the 21st Century
/in Policy Reports Behavioral/Mental Health and SUD, Care Coordination, Chronic and Complex Populations, Cost, Payment, and Delivery Reform, Health Coverage and Access, Health IT/Data, Health System Costs, Medicaid Managed Care, Medicaid Managed Care, Physical and Behavioral Health Integration, Quality and Measurement, Safety Net Providers and Rural Health, Workforce Capacity /by Lesa RairIndividuals with medical and behavioral health comorbidities often receive fragmented care, resulting in higher costs and poorer outcomes. States, the federal government, and providers have all made significant investments to build and expand evidence-based integration models, such as the collaborative care model, to reduce fragmentation and improve care. However, workforce shortages and limited resources may hinder the feasibility of these models, particularly in rural areas. Emerging evidence demonstrates that telehealth services and provider teleconsultation may be viable alternatives for individuals that are willing to participate and can deliver equal or better care when compared to traditional in-person care for individuals with behavioral health needs. While telehealth is often framed as a way to improve access in rural settings, patients in urban settings may also benefit.
While some individuals may prefer to continue to receive traditional in-person care, telehealth and teleconsultation offer opportunities for states to increase patient choice and expand the scope of services individuals can receive at their usual care site—including primary care clinics, mental health centers, and correctional facilities. These programs may also build the primary care systems’ capacity to treat mild-to-moderate behavioral health conditions. More research is necessary to understand the full effect on service utilization and healthcare costs, but early findings demonstrate that telehealth and teleconsultation programs for behavioral health services may reduce state spending or produce overall cost savings.
Read the full brief.
Promising Practices in Reaching, Enrolling, and Retaining Children in Coverage During Early ACA Implementation
/in Policy Reports CHIP, CHIP, Eligibility and Enrollment, Eligibility and Enrollment, Health Coverage and Access, Integrated Care for Children, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Medicaid Expansion, State Insurance Marketplaces /by NASHPThis brief shares strategies for finding, enrolling, and retaining children in health coverage, which other states can implement relatively quickly and inexpensively.
Many of these promising practices are the direct result of the strong working relationships between state officials and advocates and coalesce around several themes:
- Targeting outreach efforts to specific populations.
- Engaging and educating new partners.
- Keeping children enrolled in coverage.
For more information about improving children’s coverage, including links to many of the resources and promising practices listed in this paper, please visit the Advancing Children’s Coverage Toolkit.
Sign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter
Sign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter
Washington, DC Office:
1233 20th St., N.W., Suite 303Washington, DC 20036
p: (202) 903-0101
f: (202) 903-2790
Contact Us
Phone: 202-903-0101


For individuals living with complex, often chronic conditions, and their families, palliative care can provide relief from symptoms, improve satisfaction and outcomes, and help address critical mental and spiritual needs during difficult times. Now more than ever, there is growing recognition of the importance of palliative care services for individuals with serious illness, such as advance care planning, pain and symptom management, care coordination, and team-based, multi-disciplinary support. These services can help patients and families cope with the symptoms and stressors of disease, better anticipate and avoid crises, and reduce unnecessary and/or unwanted care. While this model is grounded in evidence that demonstrates improved quality of life, better outcomes, and reduced cost for patients, only a fraction of individuals who could benefit from palliative care receive it. 























































































































































