Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of hsresearchLink to Publisher's site
Health Serv Res. 2001 August; 36(4): 793–811.
PMCID: PMC1089257

Risk adjustment alternatives in paying for behavioral health care under Medicaid.


OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of various risk adjustment models in behavioral health applications such as setting mental health and substance abuse (MH/SA) capitation payments or overall capitation payments for populations including MH/SA users. DATA SOURCES/STUDY DESIGN: The 1991-93 administrative data from the Michigan Medicaid program were used. We compared mean absolute prediction error for several risk adjustment models and simulated the profits and losses that behavioral health care carve outs and integrated health plans would experience under risk adjustment if they enrolled beneficiaries with a history of MH/SA problems. Models included basic demographic adjustment, Adjusted Diagnostic Groups, Hierarchical Condition Categories, and specifications designed for behavioral health. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Differences in predictive ability among risk adjustment models were small and generally insignificant. Specifications based on relatively few MH/SA diagnostic categories did as well as or better than models controlling for additional variables such as medical diagnoses at predicting MH/SA expenditures among adults. Simulation analyses revealed that among both adults and minors considerable scope remained for behavioral health care carve outs to make profits or losses after risk adjustment based on differential enrollment of severely ill patients. Similarly, integrated health plans have strong financial incentives to avoid MH/SA users even after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Current risk adjustment methodologies do not eliminate the financial incentives for integrated health plans and behavioral health care carve-out plans to avoid high-utilizing patients with psychiatric disorders.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.8M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Ash A, Porell F, Gruenberg L, Sawitz E, Beiser A. Adjusting Medicare capitation payments using prior hospitalization data. Health Care Financ Rev. 1989 Summer;10(4):17–29. [PubMed]
  • Carter GM, Newhouse JP, Relles DA. How much change in the case mix index is DRG creep? J Health Econ. 1990;9(4):411–428. [PubMed]
  • Dunn DL. Applications of health risk adjustment: what can be learned from experience to date? Inquiry. 1998 Summer;35(2):132–147. [PubMed]
  • Ellis RP. Creaming, skimping and dumping: provider competition on the intensive and extensive margins. J Health Econ. 1998 Oct;17(5):537–555. [PubMed]
  • Ellis RP, Pope GC, Iezzoni L, Ayanian JZ, Bates DW, Burstin H, Ash AS. Diagnosis-based risk adjustment for Medicare capitation payments. Health Care Financ Rev. 1996 Spring;17(3):101–128. [PubMed]
  • Ettner SL, Frank RG, McGuire TG, Newhouse JP, Notman EH. Risk adjustment of mental health and substance abuse payments. Inquiry. 1998 Summer;35(2):223–239. [PubMed]
  • Ettner SL, Notman EH. How well do ambulatory care groups predict expenditures on mental health and substance abuse patients? Adm Policy Ment Health. 1997 Mar;24(4):339–357. [PubMed]
  • Frank RG, Huskamp HA, McGuire TG, Newhouse JP. Some economics of mental health 'carve-outs'. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1996 Oct;53(10):933–937. [PubMed]
  • Frank RG, McGuire TG, Bae JP, Rupp A. Solutions for adverse selection in behavioral health care. Health Care Financ Rev. 1997 Spring;18(3):109–122. [PubMed]
  • Frank RG, McGuire TG, Newhouse JP. Risk contracts in managed mental health care. Health Aff (Millwood) 1995 Fall;14(3):50–64. [PubMed]
  • Greenwald LM, Esposito A, Ingber MJ, Levy JM. Risk Adjustment for the Medicare program: lessons learned from research and demonstrations. Inquiry. 1998 Summer;35(2):193–209. [PubMed]
  • Manning WG. The logged dependent variable, heteroscedasticity, and the retransformation problem. J Health Econ. 1998 Jun;17(3):283–295. [PubMed]
  • Mullahy J. Much ado about two: reconsidering retransformation and the two-part model in health econometrics. J Health Econ. 1998 Jun;17(3):247–281. [PubMed]
  • Newhouse JP. Patients at risk: health reform and risk adjustment. Health Aff (Millwood) 1994 Spring;13(1):132–146. [PubMed]
  • Newhouse JP. Risk adjustment: where are we now? Inquiry. 1998 Summer;35(2):122–131. [PubMed]
  • Rogal DL, Gauthier AK. Are health-based payments a feasible tool for addressing risk segmentation? Inquiry. 1998 Summer;35(2):115–121. [PubMed]
  • Weiner JP, Dobson A, Maxwell SL, Coleman K, Starfield B, Anderson GF. Risk-adjusted Medicare capitation rates using ambulatory and inpatient diagnoses. Health Care Financ Rev. 1996 Spring;17(3):77–99. [PubMed]
  • Weiner JP, Starfield BH, Steinwachs DM, Mumford LM. Development and application of a population-oriented measure of ambulatory care case-mix. Med Care. 1991 May;29(5):452–472. [PubMed]

Articles from Health Services Research are provided here courtesy of Health Research & Educational Trust