National Academies Press: OpenBook

Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White (2005)

Chapter: Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas

« Previous: Appendix A: Technical Appendix Estimating the Impact and Cost of Expanded HIV Care Programs
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas." Institute of Medicine. 2005. Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10995.
×

Appendix B
Overview of CARE Act Allocation Formulas1

Most allocation formulasinclude ameasure ofneed, while some include measures of costs, fiscal capacity, and effort. Some formulas also contain special features such as floors and ceilings (minimum and maximum awards), “hold-harmless” provisions that prevent an area’s funding from declining too rapidly from year to year, or eligibility thresholds (NRC, 2001, 2003).

Most formulas for Titles I and II of the Ryan White CARE Act (CARE Act) allocate funds based on a jurisdiction’s disease burden, often defined as estimated living AIDS cases (ELCs). ELCs are calculated by applying annual national survival weights to 10 years of reported AIDS cases and summing the totals.2 Most of these formulas also contain one or more features like hold-harmless provisions or thresholds.

TITLE I AWARDS TO ELIGIBLE METROPOLITAN AREAS

A metropolitan area becomes eligible for Title I if it has a population of 500,000 or more and has reported a cumulative total of more than 2,000

1  

The material in this appendix is excerpted from Measuring What Matters: Allocation, Planning and Quality Assessment for the Ryan White CARE Act. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2003.

2  

Both the survival weights and the most recent 10 years of reported AIDS cases are sent to Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The survival weights are updated and recalculated every two years.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas." Institute of Medicine. 2005. Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10995.
×

cases of AIDS during the most recent five calendar years for which data are available from the CDC (HRSA, 2002a). A type of hold-harmless provision applies to Eligible Metropolitan Areas (EMAs) in that once a metropolitan area’s eligibility is established, the area remains eligible even if the number of cases drops below the threshold in later years.

Base Award

An EMA’s base award is determined by a formula based on its proportion of the total number of estimated living cases in all EMAs. The formula also includes a hold-harmless provision that limits the amount an EMA’s funding can fall from year to year, according to a schedule specified in the legislation.3 San Francisco is the only EMA that now benefits from the hold-harmless provision (HRSA, 2002c).

Supplemental Award

Supplemental awards are determined by a competitive application process, rather than by a formula. Reviewers score the application according to criteria laid out by HRSA. Either HRSA staff or external reviewers score applications. The supplemental award is divided among all EMAs, taking into account the score as well as the proportion of all ELCs that an EMA has. Three different “smoothing” algorithms are applied to see which distributes the money most appropriately. In general, no grantee is given less than 80 percent of its base formula award (HRSA, 2001).

Title I Minority AIDS Initiative

Minority AIDS Initiative (MAI) grant awards are divided among all EMAs according to a formula based on their proportion of racial and ethnic minorities AIDS cases—including African Americans, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans/Alaska Natives—diagnosed during the most recent two years for which data are available, and adjusted for reporting delays. For instance, data from 1998 and 1999 were used to calculate the Fiscal Year 2001 MAI award (HRSA, 2001).

3  

The hold-harmless award is subtracted from the total Title I supplemental funds before the latter are divided.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas." Institute of Medicine. 2005. Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10995.
×

TITLE II AWARDS TO STATES AND TERRITORIES

Base Award

Title II base awards are determined by a formula. Eighty percent of the base grant is based on each state’s proportion of the total number of ELCs. The remaining 20 percent is based on the number of ELCs in each state outside any EMAs, in proportion to the total number of such cases nationwide4 (HRSA, 2001). The base award also includes a minimum award: $200,000 for states with fewer than 90 ELCs, $500,000 for states with more than 90 ELCs, and $50,000 for all United States territories, regardless of the number of AIDS cases (HRSA, 2001). The base award formula includes a hold-harmless provision that declines annually according to a schedule established in the legislation.

States must match a portion of the Title II base award if they report more than 1 percent of the total number of AIDS cases for the two preceding fiscal years. The number of years that a state has been matching determines the percentage that it must match (20 percent the first year, 25 percent the second year, 33 percent the third year, and 50 percent in the fourth year). Puerto Rico is exempt from this requirement (HRSA, 2001).

AIDS Drug Assistance Program Award

The AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) award is based on a state’s proportion of the total ELCs in all states and territories. Unlike the Title II base award, this award does not include an 80–20 split. The formula includes a hold-harmless provision that declines annually according to a schedule established in the legislation (HRSA, 2001).

ADAP Supplemental Award

Before the ADAP award is calculated, 3 percent of the appropriated earmark is set aside for the ADAP Supplemental Award, given to states in severe need (HRSA, 2002b). A state’s supplemental ADAP award is based on its proportion of the total ELCs in qualifying states and territories. A state must match 25 percent of these federal funds to receive the award. If a qualifying state does not agree to do so, HRSA runs the formula again after deleting the nonparticipating states (HRSA, 2001).

4  

This provision was enacted under the 1996 reauthorization to provide an extra boost to states without EMAs.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas." Institute of Medicine. 2005. Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10995.
×

Title II Minority AIDS Initiative

This award is based on each state’s proportion of all African Americans, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans/Alaska Natives diagnosed during the previous two calendar years, adjusted for reporting delays. If a state or territory has no diagnosed non-white AIDS cases during the past two years, it does not receive an award (HRSA, 2001). Montana, North Dakota, American Samoa, Marshall Islands, Northern Marianas, Republic of Palau, and the Federated States of Micronesia did not qualify for this award in Fiscal Year 2002 (HRSA, 2002d).

Emerging Communities Award

Emerging communities are Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA—a community with a population greater than 50,000) that do not meet the eligibility criteria to qualify as a Title I EMA, but that have 500–1,999 reported AIDS cases in the most recent five-year period. Half the available funding goes to MSAs with 1,000–1,999 AIDS cases, while the other half is divided among MSAs with 500–999 AIDS cases. Each award is based on the area’s proportion of the total number of AIDS cases among all qualifying MSAs (HRSA, 2001).

REFERENCES

HRSA (Health Resources and Services Administration). 2001. A Primer on Title I and Title II Formula Allocation Calculations. Unpublished document. (Email communication, Steven Young, HRSA, November 11, 2001).

HRSA. 2002a. Title I: Grants to Eligible Metropolitan Areas. [Online]. Available: http://ftp.hrsa.gov/hab/titleifact.pdf [accessed May 22, 2003].

HRSA. 2002b. Title II: AIDS Drug Assistance Program. [Online]. Available: ftp://ftp.hrsa.gov/hab/adap1.pdf [accessed May 22, 2003].

HRSA. 2002c. FY2002 Ryan White CARE Act Title I Emergency Relief Grants. (Email communication, Steven Young, HRSA, July 22, 2002).

HRSA. 2002d. FY2002 Ryan White CARE Act Title II Emergency Relief Grants. )Email communication, Steven Young, HRSA, July 22, 2002.


NRC (National Research Council). 2001. Choosing the Right Formula. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

NRC. 2003. Statistical Issues in Allocating Funds by Formulas. Louis TA, Jabine TB, Gerstein MA, Eds. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas." Institute of Medicine. 2005. Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10995.
×
Page 246
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas." Institute of Medicine. 2005. Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10995.
×
Page 247
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas." Institute of Medicine. 2005. Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10995.
×
Page 248
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Overview of Care Act Allocation Formulas." Institute of Medicine. 2005. Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10995.
×
Page 249
Next: Appendix C: Mental Illness and HIV Comorbidity: A Large and Vulnerable HIV Subpopulation »
Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White Get This Book
×
Buy Hardback | $75.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Each year it is estimated that approximately 40,000 people in the U.S. are newly infected with HIV. In the late 1990s, the number of deaths from AIDS dropped 43% as a result of highly active antiretroviral therapy. Unfortunately, the complex system currently in place for financing and delivering publicly financed HIV care undermines the significant advances that have been made in the development of new technologies to treat it. Many HIV patients experience delays in access to other services that would support adhering to treatment. As a result, each year opportunities are missed that could reduce the mortality, morbidity, and disability suffered by individuals with HIV infections.

Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care examines the current standard of care for HIV patients and assesses the extent the system currently used for financing and delivering care allows individuals with HIV to actually receive it. The book recommends an expanded federal program for the treatment of individuals with HIV, administered at the state level. This program would provide timely access and consistent benefits with a strong focus on comprehensive and continuous care and access to antiretroviral therapy. It could help improve the quality of life of HIV/AIDS patients, as well as reduce the number of deaths among those infected.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!