Search

Evictions are increasingly recognized as a serious concern facing low-income households. This study evaluated whether expansions of Medicaid can prevent evictions from occurring. We examined data from a privately licensed database of eviction records in fourteen states (286 counties) and used a difference-in-differences research design to compare rates of eviction before and after California's early Medicaid expansion (51 counties). Early Medicaid expansion in California was associated with a reduction in the number of evictions, with 24.5 fewer evictions per month in each county from a pre-expansion average of 224.7. These results imply that for every thousand new Medicaid enrollees in California, Medicaid expansion was associated with roughly twenty-two fewer evictions per year. Additionally, we found a 2.9-percentage-point reduction in evictions per capita associated with early expansion. The effects were concentrated among counties with the highest pre-expansion rates of uninsurance. We conclude that health insurance coverage is associated with improved housing stability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medicaid expansions through the Affordable Care Act began in January 2014, but we have little information about what is happening in rural areas where provider access and patient resources might be more limited. In 2008, Oregon held a lottery for restricted access to its Medicaid program for uninsured low-income adults not otherwise eligible for public coverage. The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment used this opportunity to conduct the first randomized controlled study of a public insurance expansion. This analysis builds off of previous work by comparing rural and urban survey outcomes and adds qualitative interviews with 86 rural study participants for context. We examine health care access and use, personal finances, and self-reported health. While urban and rural populations have unique demographic profiles, rural populations appear to have benefited from Medicaid as much as urban. Qualitative interviews revealed the distinctive challenges still facing low-income uninsured and newly insured rural populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context The Affordable Care Act provides new Medicaid coverage to an estimated 12 million low-income adults. Barriers to access or quality could hamper the program's success. One of these barriers might be the stigma associated with Medicaid or poverty. Methods Our mixed-methods study involved 574 low-income adults and included data from an in-person survey and follow-up interviews. Our analysis of the interviews showed that many participants who were on Medicaid or uninsured described a perception or fear of being treated poorly in the health care setting. We defined this experience as stigma and merged our qualitative interviews coded for stigma with our quantitative survey data to see whether stigma was related to other sociodemographic characteristics. We also examined whether stigma was associated with access to care, quality of care, and self-reported health. Findings We were unable to identify other sociodemographic characteristics associated with stigma in this low-income sample. The qualitative interviews suggested that stigma was most often the result of a provider-patient interaction that felt demeaning, rather than an internalized sense of shame related to receiving public insurance or charity care. An experience of stigma was associated with unmet health needs, poorer perceptions of quality of care, and worse health across several self-reported measures. Conclusions Because a stigmatizing experience in the health system might interfere with the delivery of high-quality care to new Medicaid enrollees, further research and policy interventions that target stigma are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]