The Budget Crisis Impact on Centers for Independent Living

Like many other human services providers, the Illinois Network of Centers for Independent Living
(INCIL) is being hit hard by the Illinois budget crisis. Access Living is one of the 22 Centers for Independent Living (CILs) in Illinois. The CILs serve 95 of the 102 counties in Illinois. INCIL’s Executive Director, Ann Ford, shared the following, based on reports from 19 of the 22 CILs, which employ between 450-500 people:

•39 CIL staff have been laid off state wide since July 1, 2015
•93 CIL staff are working reduced hours because of furlough days, experiencing pay cuts ranging from 20% to 40%
•21 vacant CIL positions remain unfilled throughout the state (delaying hires is one way to save money)
•Two CILs are in the process of closing satellite offices
•All CILs are restricting travel, including in some areas travel to consumers’ homes
•At least four CILs are developing contingency plans to close in the event funding doesn’t come within the next six months
•It is difficult to determine how many consumers have gone without services. A reasonable estimate would be 800 to 1,000 people statewide
•The impact includes the enormous emotional toll this issue is taking on staff at all CILs, as they take on increased workloads while losing a portion of their income.

The CILs are doing the very best they can to continue to provide services to empower people with disabilities to live as independently as possible in the community. Quite often they are a real lifeline for many people with disabilities. During this difficult state budget crisis, know that your local CILs have been doing everything they can to show why their programs matter to the local community. The CILs are still waiting for just over $4 million in FY 16 budget money for CILs from the state of Illinois, as well as other funds specific to certain disability programs they run.

While Access Living has been holding on, we are very concerned about our fellow CILs at risk of closing. Please contact Ann Ford at annford@incil.org if you have questions about the network; you can also check www.incil.org to see what CILs serve your area. We also urge you to contact your Governor, state senators and representatives to urge them to work on a budget solution ASAP so that disability services are not further impacted.

Ann Ford
Executive Director
Illinois Network of Centers for Independent Living 

This was originally shared as an Advocacy Alert from Access Living.

Blacks Hit Especially Hard in Illinois Budget Impasse

February is Black History Month – and Illinois’ eighth month without a State budget. As we highlight black people’s contributions to the American narrative, the message sent by Illinois’ budget impasse is hardly celebratory.

All Illinoisans are suffering as the fragile web of supportive services slowly unravels. Communities across the state are feeling the ripple effects of layoffs, reduced services, slow State payments and the tension that comes with sustained uncertainty.

In the midst of our shared suffering, we must acknowledge this sad truth. People of color, especially black people, are enduring the deepest battle scars from this budget stalemate. And if history is our teacher, these will become the scars of future generations. America’s tortured racial history is embedded in the laws and policies that govern all of us, resulting in widening social, health and economic gaps that operating without a state budget only exacerbates.

Earlier this month, Heartland Alliance’s Social IMPACT Research Center issued a report that illustrates how pervasive these disparities are in Illinois. The study reports that despite significant dips over the past several decades, the number of Illinoisans living in poverty today, 14.4%, is almost the same as it was in the late 1960s (14.7%). While under 10% of whites in Illinois are living in poverty and Hispanic and Asian populations each have poverty rates of close to 20%, a whopping 30.6% of black people are living in poverty statewide, while making up less than 15% of Illinois’ population. And what is even more disheartening is that 43.2% of black children under the age of 17 are poor. In fact, poverty among black people outpaces that of whites, Latinos, and Asians in all age categories.

The report lays out a number of health and economic disparities by race. But what is at least as important as the data is the case the authors lay out for the “legacy of inequality” that colors public policy in America. The report offers a historical soundbite of the legalized racist policies of the past that benefited whites and created barriers for people of color, policies and practices that ignore the generational impact of those benefits and barriers, and the practice of mid-twentieth century redlining that seems to have intertwined race, ZIP code and opportunity into perpetuity.

This budget impasse threatens any progress made towards reducing inequalities in Illinois. For example, last year, for the first time in decades, Chicago saw fewer than 1,000 new HIV cases. That does not happen without a network of community organizations and institutions focused on communities hardest hit by the epidemic — black bisexual and gay men, transgender women of color, and black heterosexual women living in communities with high HIV rates. Blacks make up only 15% of the State’s population but account for 50% of new HIV cases. Yet, the governor’s proposed budget includes a devastating 66% cut to the African-American HIV/AIDS Response Act, a dedicated line of HIV funding that supports the black community, the community hardest-hit by HIV. This at a time when an estimated 6,525 Illinoisans do not know their HIV status and nearly 50% of people living with HIV in this State are not receiving any medical care or HIV medications.

One thing is abundantly clear this Black History Month in “the land of Lincoln:” Elections have consequences. We must continue to put pressure on the Governor and our state Legislature to approve a humane budget with a revenue increase even as we prepare ourselves for the next budget battle. As the late poet Maya Angelou often said, “When you know better, you do better.” We can do a lot better, Illinois.

This article was originally posted on RebootIllinois.com.

Kim Hunt
Executive Director, Pride Action Tank
AIDS Foundation of Chicago

What Really Happens After Enrolling in Medicaid Managed Care?

Health & Disability Advocates (HDA) is monitoring the rollout of the Medicare-Medicaid Alignment Initiative (MMAI) and has heard from frustrated case managers working with consumers who are confused about the enrollment process and their rights. In response, HDA developed an enrollment timeline that explains what new enrollees can expect from Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) and plan representatives upon enrollment. To produce the timeline, HDA researched the MMAI demonstration contract developed by the State of Illinois and approved by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)  HDA also solicited input from health plans on whether their on-the-ground practices were accurately reflected in the timeline.

The finished product outlines important points for case managers and their clients to consider.

One Day Changes Everything

Consumers who are enrolled in a managed care plan after the 12th day of the month will not see their coverage start until the month after next. This is relevant for consumers choosing a specific managed care plan in order to see a particular provider or specialist in that plan’s network. Submitting paperwork after the cut-off date means consumers would have to wait longer than expected for necessary treatment. Helping consumers submit required documents in a timely manner can guarantee they are connected to the medical treatment they need, which promotes continuity of care.

Stratification Sets Up Future Contact Standards

Once enrolled in a plan, all enrollees can expect to complete a Health Risk Screening within 60 days. The screen collects information on the enrollee’s physical and mental health conditions and identifies their current medical providers. This is what IlliniCare’s Health Screen looks like. Health plans use the screen to establish intensity of services and frequency of contact with Care Coordinators by stratifying the enrollee as low, moderate or high risk.

Enrollees stratified as low risk will receive annual follow-ups from their Care Coordinators while those stratified as moderate or high risk will have quarterly follow-ups. Moderate and high risk enrollees will also complete a Health Risk Assessment and create an Individualized Care Plan within 90 days. These enrollees will help form their own Interdisciplinary Care Team of healthcare providers that meets quarterly to review the Individualized Care Plan.

The Care Coordinators’ Role

Care Coordinators focus on enrollees’ healthcare needs by connecting them to necessary tests, doctors and treatment. They also facilitate information sharing among providers by leading the Interdisciplinary Care Team. Addressing enrollees’ medical needs is their priority. Care Coordinators direct less attention to linking enrollees to social supports, like housing and public benefits.

It’s also important for case managers to know that Care Coordinators must manage a substantial caseload of up to 600 enrollees. Caseloads include a blend of low, moderate and high risk enrollees, with each risk level weighted differently.

Understanding what a care coordinator can—and cannot—be expected to do is advantageous to case managers. When roles are clearly recognized, case managers know how care coordinators can be used as a resource. And in what instances an alternative referral would be more appropriate. This establishes a stronger professional relationship between case managers and care coordinators, which ultimately benefits the enrollee.

Case managers and Care Coordinators are on the front lines of healthcare reform and fostering solid working relationships between these two players will be a critical component of the success or failure of these efforts. Knowing what case managers and their clients can expect from managed care plans can lay the foundation for a strong relationship that supports the health of individuals while also furthering the goals of healthcare reform.

Bryce Marable MSW
Health Policy Analyst
Health & Disability Advocates

ACA, Medicaid and Unintended Consequences for People with Disabilities

People with disabilities who are eligible for healthcare through Medicaid may experience painful gaps in coverage during transitions. There are groups of people with disabilities that are particularly vulnerable: those who need long-term care services, those who apply but are not yet found eligible for SSI in 209b states with expanded Medicaid and youth transitioning to the adult system.

Long-term care services and supports, such as personal assistance services or durable medical equipment, are critically important to some people with disabilities. Medicaid packages for people with blindness and disabilities, or AABD or SSI Related Medicaid, offer comprehensive coverage, including long-term care supports and services. For those who need them, these services are a lifeline to independence, living in the community and employment.  Either not affordable or available through the private insurance market, Medicaid has been the sole access point for people with disabilities who need long-term care services. The Adult ACA Medicaid group, or expansion group, is a Medicaid program that may or may not provide an individual with long-term care services in any given state.

209(b) Expansion States Facing Challenges with Transitions 

One key difference across states is the option to automatically provide SSI Related Medicaid to recipients of the federally-administered state supplementary payments though the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. Ten states use at least one eligibility criterion that is more restrictive than the SSI program for Medicaid eligibility and are referred to as 209(b) states. This means that an individual in these states who applies and is found eligible for SSI must make a separate application for Medicaid coverage.

The following states are currently 209(b) states: Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Virginia. All but Missouri, Oklahoma and Virginia have expanded Medicaid eligibility through the ACA.

Limited Access to Long-Term Care and Providers in the ACA Adult Group

Because many SSI applications take longer to process than Medicaid applications, people with disabilities can frequently be found eligible for ACA Adult Medicaid while waiting for SSI eligibility to be approved. While this group of individuals who have been approved as ACA Adult Medicaid eligible has access to healthcare, they may not have access to long-term care services.

Once SSI eligibility is approved, however, the beneficiary is no longer eligible for the category of Medicaid (ACA Adult) they are currently receiving. When they are put into the correct category for coverage (SSI Related Medicaid), they are sometimes dropped from one health plan and put into another without their knowledge. The end result is a current Medicaid beneficiary who is denied or faces delayed access to long-term care services he or she should be receiving under SSI Related Medicaid, as well as potentially losing access to providers and being forced to reapply altogether.

In addition to the lack of access to needed long-term care services, people may also experience challenges related to accessing medical service providers. In some states, the integration of the ACA and managed care has vastly changed provider infrastructure, with managed care plans for SSI Related Medicaid offering different provider networks and services than ACA Adult Medicaid managed care plans.

Many individuals, especially those new to SSI Related Medicaid, will not be aware that they are in a different category until another action is taken, such applying for a Medicaid waiver service, attempting to contact their managed care plan or going to see their providers. Both of these issues can result from the timing of an individual’s Medicaid application and approval.

Youth with Disabilities Facing Challenges with Transitions

Youth with disabilities can also potentially face significant unintended consequences around access to appropriate healthcare coverage. Children with disabilities are found eligible for SSI due to a reduction in both Activities of Daily Living and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living. This means a youth can be eligible for SSI under a broader context of criteria, like an inability to socialize or play with others.

Adult disability determinations, by contrast, are made based on a disabling condition that impacts employment—not only current employment, any employment in the country that may be available to someone with such impairments. These are vastly different criteria.

As a result, many children are found eligible and begin receiving childhood SSI and SSI Related Medicaid. However, when they turn 18, they are required to meet the adult disability guidelines in order to remain eligible. Many children fail to meet those adult requirements and their benefits are terminated. Of those that are found ineligible when they turn 18, a number are later found to be eligible in further review or appeal processes. Because Medicaid waiver programs are available only to individuals who are current Medicaid recipients, a child may have waited years to be eligible for Medicaid waivers, be found eligible, only later to be denied eligibility for adult disability—which results in losing benefits under SSI Related Medicaid and SSI eligibility. If, upon later application, the individual is once again found eligible for both adult SSI and SSI Related Medicaid, he or she must now go to the back of the waiting list for the same waiver services previously lost under a youth determination. This can result in years without necessary, critical services and care.

Experiences in the States

Health & Disability Advocates conducted a short, informal survey of seven 209(b) states that have expanded Medicaid to learn more about how states identify people who are in the “wrong” eligibility category and the processes states have in place to prevent this from happening. With six of the seven states responding to the survey, HDA found that:

• Three of six respondents offer Medicaid provider packages that are different depending on whether you are in SSI Related Medicaid or ACA Related Medicaid.

• Three of the six responding states offer some variety of waivers to individuals even if they are placed in ACA Related Medicaid.

• None of the responding states have a formal process for coordinating information about individuals who transition eligibility from one service package to another.

• Four of six states are unaware of whether individuals have been improperly placed in the wrong Medicaid eligibility package; the remaining 33% have implemented trainings, but know that individuals continue to get placed into the wrong eligibility group.

• Five states (all but North Dakota) were not aware of specific alerts that notify the Medicaid beneficiary that their eligibility for one program has ended and another started.

Upon further contact, roughly half of the states were in the early stages of identifying the issue of individuals being inappropriately placed and noted a need to develop a process for re-engaging the beneficiary to get them connected to appropriate providers for maximized health.

Recommendations Going Forward

While states are currently uncertain about the scope and breadth of these issues, it is important to identify individuals who have fallen through the cracks and may experience a significant disruption in services and eligibility. At a minimum, requiring states to create an automated notification system for changes to eligibility would provide beneficiaries greater clarity and time to plan.  In North Dakota, for example, individuals receive a notice as they leave eligibility under one Medicaid group and become eligible for another. Notice of and clear information about the ramifications of the change is critical.

Another recommendation for states is to look at integration of its systems and data tracking of disability populations. Data exchanges between the state and federal systems, along with the differing eligibility criteria among various programs, should make tracking persons with disabilities a high priority for states. Minnesota, for example, is developing a new integrated system with the capacity to match data sets to a broader context of information, such as employment status. This will greatly enhance the ability of the state to make sure that people with serious health needs receive the proper services and have access to the supports they need for the greatest possible independence.

Joe Entwisle, MS, CLCP
Sr. Policy Analyst
Health & Disability Advocates

Scariest thing in the world

Wes Craven has certainly tried hard over the years to give us scary. Joss Whedon sprinkled it with humor. Edgar Allen Poe taught us all some lessons in horror.

Then there is real scary. The kind you don't find in books or movies. The slow fear that doesn't have a release in a moment involving some guy in a mask.

For two years, I was a diabetic without health insurance. Doesn't sound like the kind of thing John Carpenter would toss out there for 90 minutes, does it? But it is, without a doubt, the scariest thing on Earth.

I was laid off in 2008, one week precisely before Lehman Brothers crumbled and the global economy with it. While I was offered COBRA and searched desperately for some way to keep my insurance, there was nothing I could qualify for as a diabetic for less than $700 a month. Unemployment insurance only added up to about $1400 a month, so to pay for insurance, I'd have to skip rent or utilities or food.

Medicaid was no help either. Illinois is a great state, but our Medicaid system here is currently set up to help only the lowest of the low. I "made too much money" on unemployment, even as a diabetic, to qualify for the program.

Yet without insurance, insulin, the very thing I need to take multiple times a day just to live, would cost me insane amounts of money. I take two types of insulin. Each bottle of insulin lasts me about two to three weeks. Each bottle without insurance costs over $110-120. It would cost me over $450 a month just for my insulin. That doesn't begin to take into account the syringes, the other pills I take to help control aspects of my health as a diabetic, or any of the other conditions that I have related to my diabetes or not.

Taking care of my health looked impossible. I was lucky though. I had some amazing doctors and nurses that did everything they could to get me insulin, that helped me navigate the systems to eventually get set up for charity care where we could, and even cajoled a few pharmacy reps I think into making sure I survived. I would not be here but for their incredible hard work and help.

Despite all that hard work, it was still not always enough. I had to pay out of pocket once, early on when I still had a small emergency reserve of money, and visit the emergency room three times to get insulin when we couldn't get it fast enough from our various alternate sources. That's three ER visits that the state had to pay for, and therefore, in the end, you footed the bill through your tax dollars in the most inefficient way possible.

The Affordable Care Act changed all of that. I was one of the first to sign up for the "high-risk pool", IPXP here in Illinois, that was set up to help get those of us with pre-existing conditions in the individual market into plans that could help us until the health insurance exchanges start in 2014. I stood side-by-side with Governor Quinn as he announced the program to the public, and I defend it to this day as an important stop-gap measure.

Thanks to the subsidies made available through Obamacare, IPXP only costs me about $150 a month instead of the $700 I was quoted before. It'll be more now that I've celebrated my 35th birthday, going up to $200 a month, but that's still far better than not having insurance at all.

I got a job after three years of looking, one year after I got into the IPXP plan, but it was a contractor position that didn't offer benefits. I kept the IPXP plan through that year of employment, and I didn't have to worry about trying to wait until a job came along that offered health benefits. Now that I'm once again in the job market, I seamlessly have nothing to worry about from IPXP as it stays with me. This is what everyone can look forward to with the exchanges starting in January 2014.

One of the last fears I had left was washed away when the Supreme Court declared the ACA constitutional and upheld the law. (See my reaction to the ruling here) It's not the last hurdle, but it is one of the most important ones. There is no doubt now that Obamacare is the rightful law of the land and can help 32 million previously uninsured Americans just like me to ensure that health care is a right, not a privilege.

There are still challenges, and I hope you'll stand with me to ensure that I, and so many more just like me, never face that fear again. We will talk about many of those challenges in the days ahead, no doubt. Thank you for being interested in my story and for doing your part to ensure health care for all.

David Zoltan,
Guest Blogger for Illinois Health Matters

The Affordable Care Act: Preventing Chronic Diseases

Did you know that switching the focus from treating chronic illnesses to preventing the diseases will not only improve the health of individuals and families all over the country, but will also rein in health care costs and strengthen the economy?

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is applying this logic in its fight to lower the rate of preventable chronic illnesses, produce real savings in the health care sector, and recover lost economic activity at the local, state, and national levels. And it’s doing it in the name of prevention through effective public health initiatives.

The prevalence of chronic health conditions in the United States is taking a huge toll on our citizens, our nation’s health care spending, and our workforce. More than half of the people living in the United States have at least one chronic health condition, such as heart disease, stroke, diabetes, obesity, and cancer. Chronic health conditions account for 7 out of 10 deaths in Americaand rack up 75% of our nation’s health care spending. The cost for treating people with type 2 diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, and stroke, alone, amounts to $238 billion each year. In 2010, the United States spent almost $2.6 trillion on health care, meaning we spent around $1.9 trillion just last year on treating and managing chronic illnesses, most of which are largely preventable. Here in Illinois, more than 6.7 million people have reported being diagnosed with a chronic health condition, costing the state $12.5 billion in annual health care expenses.

What’s more is that the cost of chronic health conditions goes beyond the money spent on health care services. The toll these illnesses take on our workforce productivity is telling. According to the Gallup Poll, 7 out of 8, or 83 percent of American workers either have a chronic health condition or are obese. The poll estimates that this prevalence of chronic illness and obesity in our workers could be costing our economy $153 billion a year in lost productivity due to increased sick days. Other reports that take into account other chronic conditions and factors like lost productivity from workers who show up on the job while sick estimate that chronic health conditions are costing the United States more than $1 trillion each year in lost economic activity. To bring these statistics home, chronic disease plaguing Illinois’s workforce cost the state $14.3 billion in lost productivity. And the commonality of chronic disease is rapidly increasing. It is estimated that the number of Americans living with a chronic health condition will increase by 36%, or 46 million people by the year 2030, and that we could be spending $685 billion a year on medical treatment for chronic disease by 2020. Other sources estimate the total economic toll of chronic health conditions to reach $6 trillion a year by the middle of the century.

But it doesn’t have to be this way. As the CDC states, “Access to high-quality and affordable prevention measures (including screening and appropriate follow-up) are essential steps in saving lives, reducing disability and lowering costs for medical care.” And research has proven that for every dollar invested in effective prevention and public health initiatives, $5.60 is saved. The same study reveals that, if we invest $10 per person every year in effective community-based public health programs, we could save the United States more than $16 billion in just five years. 

Fortunately, the Affordable Care Act recognizes the benefits to be had from investing in smart and effective preventive and public health efforts. The ACA established the National Prevention, Health Promotion and Public Health Council within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), made up of secretaries from various federal departments and chaired by the Surgeon General. The Council is responsible for developing our first ever National Prevention and Health Promotion Strategy, which was released in June of 2011 and identifies four strategic directions for preventing disease and improving health nationwide. The four strategic directions are: creating healthy and safe community environments; expanding access to quality clinical and community preventive health service; empowering people to make healthy choices; and eliminating health disparities. The Council is charged with providing leadership moving forward with the National Prevention and Health Promotion Strategy.

The ACA also established a Prevention and Public Health Fund, which is administered by the Secretary of HHS, Kathleen Sebelius, and provides financial support for state and community-wide efforts to prevent disease and promote healthy lifestyles. The Fund is a 10-year, $15 billion commitment to support prevention and public health programs across the country, like theCommunity Transformation Grants, which fund community-level programs geared towards reducing the prevalence of chronic disease and promoting healthy lifestyles.   Already, $103 million in grant money has been issued to 61 different state and community programs across the country, reaching 120 million people.

So what does all of this mean for chronic disease in Illinois? Already, the State of Illinois has received $17.14 million out of the Prevention and Public Health Fund to support community- and state-level wellness and prevention programs aimed at preventing chronic disease and raising awareness about healthy living. For a breakdown of what programs received funding and for how much, visit HealthCare.gov online.

The Secretary of HHS will continue to issue funds for prevention and public health programs across the country to reverse the trend of chronic disease, so stay tuned as health reform continues to make a positive impact in our communities. To find out what other kinds of initiatives the Affordable Care Act has taken to increase access to preventive health measures and decrease illness in America, visit the Shriver Brief online.

This post was originally posted on The Shriver Brief by Caitlin Padula. It is part of a weekly “Did You Know” blog series that highlights important, but not well known features of the health reform law about prevention, wellness, and personal responsibility for our health. 

Medicaid Cuts Could Leave Hundreds of Thousands of Illinoisans Facing Life-Threatening Health Challenges

Report Details Number of Illinoisans with Cancer, Heart Disease, Stroke, Diabetes, and Chronic Lung Disease Who Depend on Medicaid for Treatment

Cuts to Medicaid would pose a specific and dangerous threat to hundreds of thousands of Illinoisans who depend on the program for regular treatment for such medical conditions as cancer, diabetes, chronic lung disease, heart disease, and stroke. Without Medicaid, many of these seriously ill Illinoisans would no longer be able to fill essential prescriptions, keep up with key screenings, or see a doctor if their condition worsens or recurs.

The importance of Medicaid to Illinoisans is detailed in a report released jointly today by the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Diabetes Association, the American Lung Association, and the health care consumer group Families USA.

Hundreds of thousands of Illinoisans are covered by Medicaid. Of this number:

• An estimated 23,760 Illinoisans with Medicaid have cancer, including 1,000 children, 15,780 adults, and 6,980 seniors;
• An estimated 97,170 Illinoisans with Medicaid have diabetes, including 7,360 children, 64,490 adults, and 25,320 seniors;
• An estimated 263,750 Illinoisans with Medicaid have chronic lung diseases such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and cystic fibrosis, including 146,650 children, 100,610 adults, and 16,480 seniors; 
• An estimated 243,990 Illinoisans with Medicaid have heart disease or stroke, including 23,540 children, 164,600 adults, and 55,850 seniors.

Although Illinois directly administers its own Medicaid program, every dollar the state spends for health coverage for low-income individuals is matched dollar-for-dollar by the federal government. Particularly during difficult economic times, this federal match helps Illinois to provide health coverage for hundreds of thousands of residents.

The treatment of chronic and life-threatening diseases can be extremely costly, and people with these illnesses often become eligible for Medicaid when they have exhausted all their financial resources paying for medical care. As an example, the average hospital charge nationally for a stay associated with a heart attack is nearly $63,000, and for people with no health insurance or with inadequate coverage, such costs can quickly drive them into poverty and qualification for Medicaid.

“Hard-working Americans with diseases such as cancer can get health coverage through Medicaid after having lost their health insurance because they are too ill to work or run through their savings,” said Christopher Hansen, President of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network. “This program is a safety net for American families, and losing access to the program could force them to stop treatment that could save their lives.”

“Diabetes has a disproportionate impact on the Medicaid population, because Medicaid provides important health coverage to people facing elevated health risks. Children and adults eligible for this valuable program are more likely to be in poor health and thus require the services Medicaid provides to a greater extent than individuals with private insurance,” said Gina Gavlak, RN, BSN, Vice Chair of the National Advocacy Committee, American Diabetes Association. “Cuts to Medicaid funding would be harmful to the millions of children, pregnant women, and adults with diabetes who rely on the program to manage their disease and avoid dangerous and costly diabetes complications such as blindness, amputations, and kidney dialysis.”

“Medicaid is the lifeline for millions of children, adults, and seniors who suffer from chronic lung disease such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and cystic fibrosis,” said Paul Billings, Vice President of National Policy and Advocacy for the American Lung Association. “If denied this critical healthcare coverage, it will result in higher healthcare costs, such as increased emergency room visits. We need to set politics aside and protect the health of our nation’s most vulnerable population, particularly our children, who will be most impacted by cuts to Medicaid.”

“Medicaid is a program that works and a program that provides urgently needed care to hundreds of thousands of people in Illinois suffering from serious but controllable diseases. It helps Illinois children get a healthier start in life and school, it helps to maintain a healthy Illinois workforce, and it helps head off medical debt, a leading cause of bankruptcies and home foreclosures,” Ron Pollack, Executive Director of Families USA, said today. “It should be crystal clear that with rising health care costs hurting family pocketbooks and with the economic downturn driving more families to depend on Medicaid, that this is precisely the wrong time to cut Medicaid funding to Illinois and other states.”

Families USA contracted with The Lewin Group to develop the estimates in this report.

Dave Lemmon, Families USA, 202-628-3030
Alissa Havens, Anerican Cancer Society Cancer Action Network
Christine Fehely, American Diabetes Association
Mary Havell, American Lung Association