Search

Large increases in the need for long-term care (LTC) services are expected as baby boomers age. Little has been published about patient and caregiver preferences for information about LTC. However, our qualitative research findings suggest that potential consumers may find it difficult to obtain accurate and timely information about LTC programs and services. In-person, semistructured interviews were conducted with 47 subjects, including patients (n = 25) within 90 days of their referral to a LTC placement (including NH, assisted living, home care, and community) and their caregivers (n = 22). Interview questions addressed the events that seemed to trigger their need for a LTC referral, the resources they used to become more informed about LTC options and the issues they confronted with the LTC referral process. Qualitative analyses identified a number of patient and informal caregiver-reported barriers to making decisions about LTC services, including insufficient information about LTC programs and community resources, unclear funding requirements and inadequate funding, and difficulty knowing how to plan for LTC or make LTC decisions. A potential solution may be an online LTC Guide designed to provide accurate information about the range of LTC services, with an emphasis on home and community-based services. This Guide was developed to address the gap in comprehensive LTC information identified in the findings of this study.

Objectives. Assisted living programs demonstrate variation in structure and services. The Department of Veterans Affairs funded this care for the first time in the Assisted Living Pilot Program (ALPP). This article presents resident health outcomes and the relationship between facility characteristics and outcomes. Method. This article presents results on 393 ALPP residents followed for 12 months after admission to 95 facilities. Results. A total of 19.8% residents died, and the average activities of daily living impairment did not change significantly. Half of the residents remained in an ALPP facility, with the average resident spending 315 days in the community during the 12-month follow-up period. This article found a limited number of characteristics of structure and staffing to be significantly associated with outcomes. Discussion. If differences among facility characteristics are not clearly related to differences in outcomes, then choices among type of setting can be based on the match of needs to available services, location, or preferences.

Objective. The Department of Veterans Affairs funded assisted living, adult family home, and adult residential care for the first time in the Assisted Living Pilot Program (ALPP). This article compares the use and cost for individuals that entered ALPP and a comparison group. Method. This was a nonrandomized study. The comparison group consisted of VA patients who were eligible but did not enter an ALPP facility. The ALPP (n = 393) and comparison (n = 259) groups were followed for 12 months to assess ALPP facility, case management, and health care costs. Results. ALPP facility and ALPP case management costs were respectively $5,560 and $2,830 per individual. Total health care costs, including ALPP costs, were $11,533 higher for the ALPP group compared to the comparison group after adjusting for baseline differences. Discussion. Although ALPP successfully helped individuals transition to longer term care in these facilities, it was more costly than the comparison group.

The purpose of this study was to obtain information about Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) long-term care (LTC) referrals that could be used to develop interventions that increase the likelihood of referrals to home and community-based services (HCBS) instead of institutional care. This primarily qualitative study was conducted at five VA Medical Centers. The study used three linked methods: interviews with patients and informal caregivers; focus groups with LTC administrators, providers, and social workers; and written rankings of the barriers to HCBS referrals. We unexpectedly identified a cluster of findings indicating the importance of physicians' role in the LTC referral process and the need for more LTC training, particularly about HCBS.

The current study surveyed 74 assisted living facilities to examine the effect of facility type on resident autonomy and the willingness of providers to admit residents requiring complex services. Facility types included adult family homes, residential care facilities, and traditional assisted living facilities. Adult family homes were more willing to admit residents with higher care needs. By contrast, assisted living facilities' policies did not support the provision of intensive services, but their policies promoted higher resident autonomy, suggesting that consumers may have to choose between autonomy and help with complex needs when exploring assisted living for long-term care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Department of Veterans Affairs funded assisted living, adult family home, and adult residential care for the first time in the Assisted Living Pilot Program (ALPP). This article compares the use and cost for individuals that entered ALPP and a comparison group. Method: This was a nonrandomized study. The comparison group consisted of VA patients who were eligible but did not enter an ALPP facility. The ALPP (n = 393) and comparison (n = 259) groups were followed for 12 months to assess ALPP facility, case management, and health care costs. Results: ALPP facility and ALPP case management costs were respectively $5,560 and $2,830 per individual. Total health care costs, including ALPP costs, were $11,533 higher for the ALPP group compared to the comparison group after adjusting for baseline differences. Discussion: Although ALPP successfully helped individuals transition to longer term care in these facilities, it was more costly than the comparison group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) funded assisted living (AL), adult family home (AFH), and residential care for the first time in the Assisted Living Pilot Program (ALPP). This article describes the background and methods of the ALPP evaluation and the characteristics and experiences of the facilities. Method: Facility data were collected from the contracting/inspection process and a survey of ALPP facilities and those contacted but not participating in ALPP. Results: Data on 131 participating facilities are presented: 41 AFHs, 47 assisted living facilities ALFs), and 43 residential care facilities (RCFs). The average facility had 33 beds (about one quarter Medicaid beds), for-profit ownership, and private rooms for ALPP residents, and about half had private baths. About two thirds of ALPP AFH providers spoke a primary language other than English. Discussion: Findings indicate that a wide range of community facilities were willing to provide care to residents with heterogeneous needs on VA funding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The number of residents in assisted living has rapidly increased, although these facilities still primarily serve people who can pay out of pocket. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs was authorized to provide this level of care for the first time in the Assisted Living Pilot Program (ALPP). We describe the residents and providers, comparing them across three facility types and other populations, to assess the characteristics and feasibility of this new approach. Design and Methods: We assessed ALPP residents and providers across seven Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. We obtained information from medical records, assessment tools, and a provider survey. Results: We report here on 743 residents placed from 2002 to 2004. The Department of Veterans Affairs contracted with 58 adult family homes, 56 assisted living facilities, and 46 residential care facilities. The average ALPP resident was a 70-year-old unmarried White man referred from an inpatient hospital and living in a private residence prior to placement. Adult family homes enrolled residents requiring greater levels of assistance with activities of daily living than other facility types. Assisted living facilities were less likely than adult family homes to admit residents with functional disabilities and less likely than either adult family homes or adult residential care facilities to admit residents with certain care needs. Implications: ALPP placed residents with a wide range of characteristics in community facilities that varied widely in size and services. This information can help determine the role of this type of care in and outside of the Department of Veterans Affairs. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]