Older adults have a problem navigating a long-term care services and support system that are characterized by loose coordination, inconsistent communication, fragmented delivery, and navigation difficulty by consumers and providers as well. You will find multiple entry points for services, multiple services with differing degrees of qualification and approvals, county-by-county variations, duplicative regulations, and paperwork that characterize a confusing and disjointed system.
Family caregivers, self-employed and care-dependent older adults, and middle-class seniors are likely to fall between the gaps, and may struggle to afford self-pay but do not qualify for many services. They are a few of the conclusions contained in a newly issued Joint State Government report on long-term treatment issues in Pennsylvania. The record includes 37 specific policy findings and/or recommendations.
Note: I’ve italicized immediate quotations from the statement. Pennsylvania Legislature. It provides lawmakers with a means for conducting interdisciplinary studies. The JSGC LONG-TERM Care statement was written in response to a legislative obtain a study of the Commonwealth’s delivery system of long-term care services and supports for impartial and care-dependent older adults. To conduct its study the JSGC created an advisory committee of 29 experts. The purpose of this advisory committee and JSGC staff was to objectively review the issues relating to long-term care, establish the existing condition of services, and supports, and evaluate the needs of the growing populace of elderly people.
In addition, the JSGC staff did background research and traveled throughout the condition to consult with stakeholders, visit nursing homes, helped living residences, personal treatment homes, carrying on care retirement communities, day services adult, and older centers, and hold information periods. The suggestions of the advisory committee are contained within the Findings & Recommendations section, which include several proposed statutory and regulatory changes. The suggestions propose plan and legislative changes that concentrate on more efficiently and effectively get together the needs of consumers.
The amount of consensus attained by the advisory committee is amazing given its diverse account and the reality that long-term care stakeholders have very strong and described special passions with huge dollar implications predicated on policies adopted. If this mixed group could agree on 37 points, the state should take heed.
In addition to its Findings and Recommendations the report includes useful background information on the long-term care system in Pennsylvania. The authors recognize that Pennsylvania is facing a “silver tsunami” at its doorstep as the baby boomers raise the need for maturing services. The graying of this condition has increased demand on both services and financing.
We cannot meet this increasing tide solely by increasing efficiency or avoidance. How does the condition deliver more services to more folks given budgetary constraints? How can those ongoing services be safeguard with no unintended impact of regulations on providers, making them spend additional time on compliance paperwork than delivery of care?
How can true consumer choice be advertised when there may not be the money to support those choices? There is certainly no one solution and the intricacy of the mixed funding, delivery, and support systems will keep this pressing concern on the front burner for family members, consumers, and policy manufacturers in the years to come. The best goal is to maintain coordination of care in a consumer directed model that connects people with the right services when these are needed. The record contains some errors that reflect the immense intricacy of the laws and regulations involved in our current health and long term care delivery system.
- Focus on benefits, not loss
- 15 -$0.55 -$0.55
- 5% (for higher level taxpayers)
- Tim Hortons (THI) – $32.00
But, overall it’s description of the dysfunction in the operational system is accurate, and its findings and suggestions provide an excellent resource for policy makers who have the responsibility of protecting our frail and vulnerable elderly. Long-term care is not an investment in the future for the state’s children, it does not maintain the infrastructure in highways or bridges, but it serves an important government function to help its most susceptible citizens. That function may be as critical as the constitutional responsibility to protect the ongoing health, welfare, and basic safety of all Pennsylvanians.
The aged signify some of the most vulnerable of those citizens, an era that has paid its dues and should receive a known degree of programs and services to its benefit. Policy makers often concentrate on getting the youngest citizens to a great start in life off, but the oldest citizens need the opportunity to end their days with choice, dignity, and respect.