The 130th Annual Meeting of APHA

Abstract #35396

Shana A. Lavarreda, MPP, Center for Health Policy Research, University of California, Los Angeles, 10911 Weyburn Ave., Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90024, 310-794-2261, shana@ucla.edu

Congress enacted the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) in 1997 to provide additional sources for health insurance to uninsured children. Each state could choose the administrative method by which they would implement CHIP: 1) expand Medicaid to include CHIP eligibility requirements, 2) create an entirely new, separate program, or 3) a combination of the two. When state evaluations became available covering operations until September 1999, a natural experiment existed. Using cost-effectiveness analysis, I evaluated which administrative choice had the most impact on how many children were covered in each state. With multivariate regression holding costs constant, along with other variables, the effect of the administrative choice on the increase in children’s coverage was isolated. Although the separate method seemed to yield slightly worse results, this assertion cannot be made with any conclusiveness. No significant relationship exists between administrative method and increase in children’s coverage. Instead, outreach effectiveness, existence of co-pays, and uncontrollable factors such as time in operation had greater importance. These results should not be taken as the final word on the matter, but rather as strong indicators of where future research and activism should move in order to maximize enrollment.

Learning Objectives:

• At the conclusion of this presentation, the listener will be able to prioritize local CHIP advocacy to maximize enrollment.

Keywords: Child Health, Public Health Policy

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.