What accounts for reducing healthcare costs, faster recovery of seriously ill clients and improved physical and cognitive heatlh? You will never guess – bringing services to where these clients live.
The private assisted living industry is now fully engaged in servicing elderly clients in their homes. Most major assisted living chains are now caring for clients by dispatching caregivers to their homes at a cost of $240/day. Most have seen a growth of 20% in this line of service. The impetus to engage in this line of service may have come as a result of the stagnation that private facilities have been experiencing for the last five years; or, perhaps it may have been the result of several studies revealing that 89% of elders wish to remain at home as long as possible. Hospitals are finding out that seriously ill elders do better when medical services are provided in their homes.
John Hopkins University School of Medicine began the home-hospital movement back in 1996 as a pilot program. Research has proven that elders with potentially deadly diseases like congestive heart failure and cellulites can be safely treated at home with astonishing results. Not only was the care as safe and as satisfactory as hospital care, but recovery was faster and the cost much lower, 60% less.
There is no doubt that the trend in the future will be to provide as many services as possible to elders in their homes. A great idea!
This has been our battle cry for over twenty years. The benefits of keeping seniors at home with needed services has proven to be cost-effective, beneficial to the health of these clients and responsive to seniors’ desires. And yet, change has come slowly particularly in southern states. Under the pressure of skyrocketing Medicaid budgets fueled by the increasing numbers of low-income seniors our policymakers have had to shift toward funding more community instead of institutional care (nursing homes), what is called in the industry: “rebalancing long-term care.”
One state that has been successful in doing so is Oregon that rebalanced their budget back in the early 1980’s. Many other states have followed, including Washington and Colorado. The number of people receiving Medicaid-funded nursing facility care in these states grew at a much slower rate than in the rest of the nation from the inception of Medicaid home and community-based waiver programs in the early 19080s to 1994. The number of people in nursing homes as a proportion of the population age 75 and above in these states decreased faster than the average for the rest of the nation. Total annual Medicaid spending on nursing facilities also increased at a slower rate in the study states than nationally after controlling for growth of the age 75-and-older population.
Today only a handful of states remain committed to forcing seniors into nursing homes when no longer able to live independently – Kentucky, Virginia, Alabama and West Virginia do not pay for assisted living services. Although an increasing number of states have created Medicaid waivers to pay for assisted living services, the funding always falls short of the need which creates long waiting lists. clients in need of assisted living services cannot wait the two or three years it takes to receive an allocation. So seniors and disabled adults are still forced into nursing homes and we continue to pay for poor quality and undesirable care.
In 2003 our firm started the conversation with the Department of Housing and Urban Development urging them to join forces with the Department of Health and Human Services (federal Medicaid program) to properly fund community care at least for those living in public/subsidized housing. Seven years later, it happened and both departments partnered to create the Community Living Initiative that funds housing and services for low-income disabled adults. Seniors, however, have to wait longer and as of today no initiatives have been taken to address the issues of the seniors.
Apparently financial crisis alone will not prompt the federal government to act. I firmly believe the issue of low-income seniors ending up in nursing homes prematurely must arouse public opinion. Those most affected, the seniors, the families, the advocates, need to demand this change. Rather than being remembered as the “silent minority” we must be remembered as the generation that changed the way we care for seniors in this country.
America is a relatively young country as far as the percentage of individuals 65 years and older in the U.S. today. About 12% of the population in the U.S. is 65 years and older. However, that percentage is projected to increase to 20% within the next decade. Compare those numbers with that of other countries like Japan with the highest percentage of seniors currently at 21.5% of the population. Global aging affects all aspects of our society: work, health care, retirement, services and housing, among others. One of the major challenges is what we call the dependency ratio which means that for every person age 65 years and older there will be fewer than two persons in the workforce and available to care for the older generation. Exceptions are those countries with high birth rates (Mexico, Iceland and Turkey) or in countries like Australia, Canada and New Zealand with high immigration. However, in most countries the dependency ratio will sharply increase from 2020 to 2050. It is becoming more important that we create new ways to care for this aging population that is cost effective and dignified. The U.S. has the highest per capita health care expenditure in the world with a per capita cost per individual of $6,714. Japan, on the other hand, has the lowest health expenditure with a per capita expenditure of $2,581, half of that of the U.S. Most of the expenditure in Japan is paid by the government.
During the Ashoka Summit held this month we were able to discuss with other Fellows challenges facing their countries. Masue Katayama, a Fellow from Japan, has worked for the past twenty years in providing services to the older population in Japan. She came to learn how our firm has been able to change how we care for this older population. We believe that the global financial crisis is pushing us to make due with less and to learn how to use government funding more efficiently. Our firm has a proven track record of being able to service three times as many seniors with the funding the government spends on one. Japan, along with many European countries, has older people and lower health care spending than the U.S. They do this by fixing prices and manipulating prices to keep costs down. Every two years the price of each treatment, test and medication is examined to see if excess profits are leading to overuse and if so the price is cut. This is not done in the U.S. because those who profit from high prices are so powerful. This rationing and price cutting impacts the ability to control chronic illnesses at an early stage. Instead of rationing, Japan should look at ways to improve people’s lives by systematically changing lifestyles through better diets, exercise, medication management and supervision. This is something that Japan and other European countries can learn from the U.S.
Masue and I sat down to establish a collaborative effort that will enable us to learn from each other. She visited one of our affordable assisted living facilities and was impressed with the home atmosphere and the improvement in the physical and cognitive health of our residents. We agreed to formalize this collaboration by her sending a group of her operators to the U.S. for a month to live and learn at one of our facilities. Mia will do the same as we know that there are lessons to be learned from Japan as they tackle the common challenges of global aging.