<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Measuring Health Reform&#8217;s Early Success</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/03/measuring-health-reforms-early-success/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/03/measuring-health-reforms-early-success/</link>
	<description>The Ultimate Massachusetts Health Care Insider Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:46:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: HCFA</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/03/measuring-health-reforms-early-success/#comment-1783</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[HCFA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jun 2008 17:42:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1666#comment-1783</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sharon Long replies:

In response to Mr. Hovestadt’s question from June 12th:  Since the Massachusetts Health Reform Survey that is used in the study doesn&#039;t follow the same individuals over time, we aren&#039;t able to identify the adults who were &quot;newly&quot; covered in fall 2007.  We can only say that, as a group, low-income adults (defined as those with incomes less than 300% FPL) faced fewer financial barriers to care in fall 2007 than in fall 2006.

The figures that you are asking about are based on all low-income adults – which was approximately the same number of people for both rounds of the survey.  That is, 16.9 percent of all low-income adults in fall 2007, as compared to 27.3 percent of all low-income adults in fall 2006, reported unmet need for care in the last year because of costs.

So over that time, the total number of low-income people with financial barriers to care dropped, as well as the percentage.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sharon Long replies:</p>
<p>In response to Mr. Hovestadt’s question from June 12th:  Since the Massachusetts Health Reform Survey that is used in the study doesn&#8217;t follow the same individuals over time, we aren&#8217;t able to identify the adults who were &#8220;newly&#8221; covered in fall 2007.  We can only say that, as a group, low-income adults (defined as those with incomes less than 300% FPL) faced fewer financial barriers to care in fall 2007 than in fall 2006.</p>
<p>The figures that you are asking about are based on all low-income adults – which was approximately the same number of people for both rounds of the survey.  That is, 16.9 percent of all low-income adults in fall 2007, as compared to 27.3 percent of all low-income adults in fall 2006, reported unmet need for care in the last year because of costs.</p>
<p>So over that time, the total number of low-income people with financial barriers to care dropped, as well as the percentage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Healthy Blog &#187; CommCare Consumes Connector</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/03/measuring-health-reforms-early-success/#comment-1782</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[A Healthy Blog &#187; CommCare Consumes Connector]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:29:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1666#comment-1782</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] about the recent health reform implementation statistics. The Urban Institute/BCBS Foundation survey results indicated that the MA uninsurance rate had decreased by almost 50% from the fall of 2006 to the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] about the recent health reform implementation statistics. The Urban Institute/BCBS Foundation survey results indicated that the MA uninsurance rate had decreased by almost 50% from the fall of 2006 to the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed Hovestadt</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/03/measuring-health-reforms-early-success/#comment-1781</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ed Hovestadt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:59:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1666#comment-1781</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am interested in the calculation of the following stats you presented.

&quot;Fewer Financial Barriers To Care: In fall 2007, 16.9 percent of low-income adults said that they had not received needed care in the past twelve months because of cost, compared to 27.3 percent in fall 2006. The proportion of low-income adults with more than $500 in out-of-pocket spending dropped from 48.2 percent in fall 2006 to 37.4 percent in fall 2007.&quot;

Is this calculated with the &quot;new&quot; amount of people being covered? If so What are the number of people we are talking about.
27.3 % of how many people compared to 16.9% of how many people, didn&#039;t get care because of cost?
48.2% of how many people compared to 37.4% of how many people had $500 in out of pocket expenses?

I wonder whether the many people forced into health care converage now not only lose the money they pay in premiums but also can not seek care for any but the most serious health care issues because deductibles and copays are too high.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am interested in the calculation of the following stats you presented.</p>
<p>&#8220;Fewer Financial Barriers To Care: In fall 2007, 16.9 percent of low-income adults said that they had not received needed care in the past twelve months because of cost, compared to 27.3 percent in fall 2006. The proportion of low-income adults with more than $500 in out-of-pocket spending dropped from 48.2 percent in fall 2006 to 37.4 percent in fall 2007.&#8221;</p>
<p>Is this calculated with the &#8220;new&#8221; amount of people being covered? If so What are the number of people we are talking about.<br />
27.3 % of how many people compared to 16.9% of how many people, didn&#8217;t get care because of cost?<br />
48.2% of how many people compared to 37.4% of how many people had $500 in out of pocket expenses?</p>
<p>I wonder whether the many people forced into health care converage now not only lose the money they pay in premiums but also can not seek care for any but the most serious health care issues because deductibles and copays are too high.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wellsoul2</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/03/measuring-health-reforms-early-success/#comment-1780</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wellsoul2]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1666#comment-1780</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[These figures seem like total baloney to me.
I&#039;m uninsured so I&#039;m one of supposedly 7 pct.
of adults by this report.
I guess the other 93 pct can afford the $250 a
month I would pay to get coverage.
I find it ridiculous to think they are counting
right. Do they eliminate really poor people in the number figuring they are part of medicaid?
I work in social services and 40 pct of employees
in my company can&#039;t/don&#039;t take health insurance.

The estimates in everyone&#039;s reports seem too low
for uninsured. Look around you at the cooks, maids, people that wash your car and mow your lawn. Take a ride on the MBTA or a walk in a
working class city. Those 7 pct of uninsured
sure seem to make a bigger crowd than expected.

All these reports are propaganda. They scared
3pct more people into taking health insurance
they probably can&#039;t afford and will have to drop
when it inevitably costs even more.

The system is broken. Mandating that we all get into the sinking boat and row will not help in the long run.

In 1997 some national estimates said 19pct of adults nationwide were uninsured. That was ten years ago when it cost 1/3 what it does now.

They take a survey to find out who is uninsured?
This seems really dumb..where are the figures
from employers? They only report what makes their
happy case. Things are getting worse not better.
How many will drop coverage to pay for gas and heating oil this year? Get real.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These figures seem like total baloney to me.<br />
I&#8217;m uninsured so I&#8217;m one of supposedly 7 pct.<br />
of adults by this report.<br />
I guess the other 93 pct can afford the $250 a<br />
month I would pay to get coverage.<br />
I find it ridiculous to think they are counting<br />
right. Do they eliminate really poor people in the number figuring they are part of medicaid?<br />
I work in social services and 40 pct of employees<br />
in my company can&#8217;t/don&#8217;t take health insurance.</p>
<p>The estimates in everyone&#8217;s reports seem too low<br />
for uninsured. Look around you at the cooks, maids, people that wash your car and mow your lawn. Take a ride on the MBTA or a walk in a<br />
working class city. Those 7 pct of uninsured<br />
sure seem to make a bigger crowd than expected.</p>
<p>All these reports are propaganda. They scared<br />
3pct more people into taking health insurance<br />
they probably can&#8217;t afford and will have to drop<br />
when it inevitably costs even more.</p>
<p>The system is broken. Mandating that we all get into the sinking boat and row will not help in the long run.</p>
<p>In 1997 some national estimates said 19pct of adults nationwide were uninsured. That was ten years ago when it cost 1/3 what it does now.</p>
<p>They take a survey to find out who is uninsured?<br />
This seems really dumb..where are the figures<br />
from employers? They only report what makes their<br />
happy case. Things are getting worse not better.<br />
How many will drop coverage to pay for gas and heating oil this year? Get real.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wonk Room &#187; Report: Massachusetts Health Care Reform Increased Access To Care, Reduced Number Of Uninsured</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/03/measuring-health-reforms-early-success/#comment-1779</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wonk Room &#187; Report: Massachusetts Health Care Reform Increased Access To Care, Reduced Number Of Uninsured]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 18:46:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1666#comment-1779</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] care reform to improve access to affordable health insurance. Here are some of the report&#8217;s key findings: &#8211; Increased Access To Care: One year after Massachusetts adopted comprehensive reform, [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] care reform to improve access to affordable health insurance. Here are some of the report&#8217;s key findings: &#8211; Increased Access To Care: One year after Massachusetts adopted comprehensive reform, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

