Medicaid:

Decline in Spending Growth Due to a Combination of Factors

T-HEHS-97-91: Published: Mar 4, 1997. Publicly Released: Mar 4, 1997.

Additional Materials:

Contact:

William J. Scanlon
(202) 512-7114
contact@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

GAO discussed recent Medicaid spending trends and their potential implications for future outlays, focusing on: (1) the variation in Medicaid spending growth among the states, especially for the most recent 2-year period, that culminated in the 3.3-percent growth rate in fiscal year 1996; (2) key factors that contributed to the decrease from previous years' growth rates; and (3) the implications of these and other factors for Medicaid expenditures in the future.

GAO noted that: (1) GAO found no single pattern across all states that accounts for the recent dramatic decrease in the growth of Medicaid spending; (2) rather, a combination of factors, some affecting only certain states and others common to many states, explains the low 1996 growth rate; (3) several states saw substantial drops in their 1996 growth rates associated with circumstances that are unlikely to recur to dampen spending increases in future years; (4) moreover, the vast majority of states experienced declines in their growth rates that were moderate to limited; (5) the experiences of these states reflect a number of factors at work, including a generally improved economy and state initiatives to limit expenditure growth, such as implementing managed care for primary and acute care services or alternative programs for long-term care; (6) with an improved economy and declining unemployment, the number of people eligible for Medicaid decreased; (7) in addition, a dramatic slowdown in price increases for medical services helped states control costs for certain services provided through Medicaid; (8) while the magnitude of the effect of states' programmatic changes, such as managed care programs and long-term care alternatives, is less clear, there is evidence that they helped to restrain program costs; (9) however, it is likely that the 3.3-percent growth rate is not indicative of the growth rate in the years ahead; and (10) just as a number of factors converged to bring about the drop in the 1996 growth rate, so a variety of factors, including a downturn in the economy, could result in increased growth rates in subsequent years.

Sep 15, 2016

Sep 14, 2016

Sep 12, 2016

Sep 9, 2016

Sep 6, 2016

Aug 31, 2016

Looking for more? Browse all our products here