Supporting Statement - Part B - CFC Evaluation 20130917 gwt

Supporting Statement – Part B

Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods

1 . Describe (including a numerical estimate) the potential respondent universe and any sam­pling or other respondent selection method to be used. Data on the number of entities (e.g., establishments, State and local government units, households, or persons) in the universe covered by the collection and in the corre­sponding sample are to be provided in tabular form for the universe as a whole and for each of the strata in the proposed sample. Indicate expected response rates for the collection as a whole. If the collection had been conducted previously, include the actual response rate achieved during the last collection.

We will be conducting interviews with individuals working in Medicaid, specifically on home- and community-based services and the CFC where applicable. We will employ a purposive sampling strategy, as our inquiry will be focused, first, on states which have approved State Plan Amendments (SPA) for the Community First Choice (CFC) Option (N=2), and second on states we identify through secondary sources that have a high personal care burden that have not expressed their intent to apply for CFC (N=approximately 13). High personal care burden is defined as the top quartile of states in terms of either total expenditures of personal care services (PCS), share of Medicaid beneficiaries who receive PCS, share of Medicaid spending on PCS, or PCS spending per participant. We will ask questions about the decision to apply or not to apply for the CFC program. We will invite all individuals at the State level who work on CFC or participated in the decision not to apply for CFC to these interviews to speak with us. We expect to speak with 2 to 3 informants per state.

2. Describe the procedures for the collection of information including:

- Statistical methodology for stratification and sample selection,

- Estimation procedure,

- Degree of accuracy needed for the pur­pose described in the justification,

- Unusual problems requiring specialized sampling procedures, and

- Any use of periodic (less frequent than annual) data collection cycles to reduce burden.

As we are not drawing a sample for statistical estimation, we will not be employing these procedures.

3. Describe methods to maximize response rates and to deal with issues of non-response. The accuracy and reliability of information collected must be shown to be adequate for intended uses. For collections based on sam­pling, a special justification must be provid­ed for any collection that will not yield 'reliable' data that can be generalized to the uni­verse studied.

States approved for CFC are required by statute to provide information to support the evaluation of Community First Choice. In cases where we do not receive a response, we will ask CMS to reach out and facilitate response. For non-CFC states, there is no obligation to respond but we anticipate that they will be willing to respond and share their experience as a way to inform future directions and programs that support home and community-based services.

4. Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken. Testing is encouraged as an effective means of refining collections of information to minimize burden and improve utility. Tests must be approved if they call for answers to identical questions from 10 or more respondents. A proposed test or set of tests may be submitted for approval separate­ly or in combination with the main collection of information.

This is not applicable as we are not conducting a statistical survey.

5. Provide the name and telephone number of individuals consulted on statistical aspects of the design and the name of the agency unit, contractor(s), grantee(s), or other person(s) who will actually collect and/or analyze the information for the agency.

This is not applicable as we are not conducting a statistical survey.

2