Research has indicated that people who have intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) appear to be more vulnerable to having a co-existing psychiatric diagnosis. This study examined Medicaid 1915(c) Home and Community-Based Services (HCBS) waiver applications for people with IDD to determine the mental/behavioral health services proposed. We found that a large variance exists across states in projected spending for services, spending per participant, annual hours of service per participant, and hourly reimbursement rates. Moreover, compared to overall funding we found a general lack of state commitment to mental/behavioral services. States must shore up the capacity of their HCBS 1915

Adults with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities (IDD) in the United States are supported by both formal Medicaid‐funded long‐term services and supports and family caregivers. Lack of alternative housing options and wait lists for long‐term services and supports means the role of the family caregiver is and will continue be critical. Rising long‐term services and supports costs combined with goals to improve care coordination and access to services are driving more states to change the design of their long‐term services and supports systems to a Medicaid‐Managed Long‐Term Services and Supports (MLTSS) approach. Best practices for implementing MLTSS for individuals with IDD include acknowledging the family caregiver role. The current study's aim is to understand how family caregivers and their roles are recognized in MLTSS for adults with IDD in Kansas. Kansas was selected given their unique approach to MLTSS for adults with IDD, referred to as KanCare. In‐depth semi‐structured telephone interviews were completed with 31 stakeholders in Kansas, including statewide/regional representatives (N = 13), service coordination providers (N = 7), and family caregivers (N = 11). Additional family support services were available in KanCare, but families had difficulty accessing them. No formal processes were reported for assessing the needs of family caregivers in KanCare and families found communications with managed care entities challenging. Families reported difficulties with taking on responsibility of managing in‐home supports and there were concerns about being paid to provide care as a guardian. Family caregivers play a critical role in MLTSS, including assisting with care coordination and access to services. However, their role was not formally acknowledged in KanCare. Future research, practice, and policy efforts should focus on promoting family caregiver assessments and identifying best practices for supporting family caregivers in MLTSS.

Many adults with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities (IDD) can access health and long-term services and supports (LTSS) through Medicaid. States are reforming their Medicaid LTSS programs from a fee-for-service model to a Medicaid managed LTSS (MLTSS) approach, anticipating improved quality of care and reduced costs, although there is limited evidence of MLTSS effectiveness. This study's objective was to contribute to the growing MLTSS research literature by describing MLTSS implementation in Kansas for adults with IDD. Thirty-one stakeholders completed in-depth semi-structured interviews, representing state or regional groups, service coordination providers, and family caregivers. Findings identify key aspects of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' new MLTSS regulations in the design and implementation of MLTSS programs.

No single U.S. health surveillance system adequately describes the health of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). Researchers and policy makers have sought to understand the potential of state and local administrative and survey data to produce a local as well as a national picture of the health of the population with IDD. Analyses of these secondary data sources have significant appeal because of the potential to derive new information without the burden and expense of new data collection. The authors examined the potential for data collected by states and territories to inform health surveillance in the population with IDD, including data from the administration of eligibility-based supports, health insurance claims, and surveys administered for monitoring and quality improvement. Although there are opportunities to align and harmonize datasets to enhance the available information, there is no simple path to use state and local data to assess and report on the health of the population with IDD. Recommendations for policy, practice, and research include the development and use of consistent operational definitions in data collection, and research to fill knowledge gaps.

No abstract