GOVERNMENT HEALTH PROGRAM 2
Most states have exhibited high standards of managed Medicaid program. However,
various states have poor standards of managed Medicaid. It is recommendable for these states to
change their approach to quality management. Despite the fact that Medicaid program is meant
to help people with little income, it must also focus on quality. Johnson (2002) highlights that
some of the poorly performing states such as Ohio still find it difficult to enhance quality. This is
impacted by the lack of adequate data to evaluate quality. These states must insist on effective
methods of gathering data such as the use of clinical reports. They must also establish productive
processes of assessing the data to come up with a reliable quality management plan.
The access and utilization stage of health care is also essential in the implementation of
managed Medicaid. Poorly performing states must identify appropriate methods of managing
access and utilization. Due to the dynamic nature of the healthcare environment, I would
recommend that they adopt both in-house management methods and the use of contractors. In
this case, contractors would entirely focus on mobilizing and evaluating accessibility to
healthcare (Johnson, 2002). However, in-house management would oversee the activities of the
contractors. This will result in a comprehensive program that enables residents of the state to
have full access to health care. Financial performance is also a critical stage during the
implementation of the Medicaid program. Most states fail to meet the standards for a
comprehensive plan due to poor financial management. Apparently, Arizona is the only state that
has a highly organized staff for financial oversight (Johnson, 2002). I would recommend the
other states to hire qualified financial specialists as part of their financial oversight staff. This
will help to make reasonable and reliable financial decisions for the implementation of the
Medicaid program.
