Gov. Sam Brownback's plan to remake the state Medicaid program got a chilly reception Monday at the first of two scheduled public forums on KanCare.
There were nearly two hours of comments and questions from a crowd of more than 200 people gathered at a Wichita State University auditorium. Most of the response was negative.
There were 40 comments — officially capped at three minutes each, though many went much longer. Most came from relatives of the elderly, disabled and mentally ill or from medical providers who cater to those groups.
They would be the groups most affected by the administration's KanCare plan, which aims to expand fixed-cost managed care to include virtually all the 380,000 Kansans currently on Medicaid.
The comments mostly touched on one or more common concerns:
The timeline to implement the plan in January was too fast Fear that patients' existing providers couldn't be kept under the plan That managed care would result in loss of services, Some people also expressed worries that the Brownback administration was setting up Kansas for problems experienced by other states under managed care.
'Soft science' Commenter Richard Harris said attempts to reform Medicaid have been based on "soft science and limited evidence."
"The concerns I have boil down to the evidence. Most managed care operations cut services and do not significantly cut expenses," he said. "I challenge the governor and lieutenant governor to name for us any state in which the system you are proposing has worked and has provided a higher level of service across the board at a lower cost to the state."
For the most part, comments and questions were accepted without direct answers from the Brownback administration. Officials present included: Dr. Robert Moser, secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, the agency which administers Medicaid through its Health Care Finance division; Health Care Finance Director Kari Bruffett; Kansas Department on Aging Secretary Shawn Sullivan; and Gary Haulmark, deputy secretary at the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services. At least three legislators also attended: Sen. Dick Kelsey, a Goddard Republican, Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau, a Wichita Democrat, and Rep. Steve Alford, a Ulysses Republican.
During two, 15-minute presentations before the comment period, Moser and Sullivan attempted to address common concerns they said they already had heard. Sullivan said the alternative to KanCare was not the status quo.
'Huge cuts looming' "The alternatives to the changes we're making are continued cost increases, the risk of reimbursement rates to providers that threaten the quality of care provided, (and) huge cuts for Medicaid that are looming at the federal level probably to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars," he said.
"The one thing we are not doing that often gets reported...is that we're turning this Medicaid system over to private contractors. That's not our intent at all. We already have 73 percent of those we serve in Medicaid on a managed-care type system," Sullivan said.
"We have not turned over the contracting of Medicaid to those vendors to just do whatever they want. We have extremely stringent performance standards, pay-for-performance measures, there will be very distinct outcome and accountability measures that the state will build into this. This will be a partnership between the state and vendors."