In August, 2013, the Coalition for Whole Health released a toolkit to provide state-level advocates with the materials they need to advocate for strong implementation and oversight of the ACA’s essential health benefits, parity, and network adequacy protections in their state.
In 2006, the Board of Directors formalized the longstanding direction and tradition of the College to not take positions on public policy. In doing so, then president Dr. Eric Goplerud drafted an Arm Chair Reflection explaining why. The College continues to serve as the place where we wrestle with difficult ideas and seek to inform one another, without creation of a policy agenda.
ACMHA: The College for Behavioral Health Leadership is pleased to present highlights from an evening with three distinguished leaders: King Davis, PhD; Mary Jane England, MD; and HG Whittington, MD. In an interview format we hear how particular experiences shaped them and through their stories, we learn what motivates them, drives their passion, and how they sustain their enthusiasm for innovation in the face of undeniable challenges.
ACMHA: The College for Behavioral Health Leadership is pleased to present an evening with three of ACMHA’s distinguished leaders: King Davis, PhD; Mary Jane England, MD; and HG Whittington, MD. In an interview format led by emerging leaders from the College, we heard how particular experiences shaped them and their leadership skills. Through their stories, we learned what motivates them, what drives their passion, and how they sustain their enthusiasm for innovation in the face of undeniable challenges. Please enjoy this dynamic conversation!
In a commentary for Health Affairs, Michael Hoge and coauthors summarize the substantial and growing body of evidence that the current mental health and substance abuse workforce is seriously inadequate with regard to number of practitioners, lack of diversity in its composition and overall preparation. The authors recognize that, with a growing number of older and ethnically diverse Americans who are at high risk for behavioral health disorders, combined with the sheer influx of newly insured, the system is at a point of crisis. They call on the Federal government to scale up and actually implement already identified “broad strategies and specific actions necessary” to grow and strengthen the mental health and substance abuse workforce to meet the challenges it faces now and in the future.
Most acts of violence are committed by people who are not mentally ill. And people with mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators. But tragedies like those in Newtown, Aurora, and Tucson nevertheless tend to jumpstart vital conversations about mental health services and policy.
I was in a meeting today in Washington, DC sharing the podium with a wonderful physician from Deloitte’s healthcare group. One of his observations was that many healthcare providers are moving away from becoming Medicare-approved Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) because the potential rewards pale in comparison to the cost and complexity of playing in the Medicare ACO game. He predicted that we will continue to move toward “accountable care” in the United States, but it may not take the form of a Medicare ACO.
Together with the noisiness of the Greatest Recession, governmental deficits, and national health reform, a quiet and little-noticed revolution is taking place in our notions about the role of one’s community in health and well-being.
We live in a transformational time in the history of medicine and health care. The 21st century will be a time of dramatic change, incredible breakthroughs, and totally altered thinking about health, medicine, and health care delivery. This book sets forth what health care and medicine will look like in the years ahead. It takes a look at history, the transformational changes going on today, the health of Americans, the nine dynamic flows that are shaping health care in the United States, and definitions and descriptions of the new institutions of the future landscape of health care and medicine.
Terrible fiscal times create the political will to implement big changes, including some long overdue ones that involve changing how and where we serve people with psychiatric disabilities.
Here is the dilemma: health care, predominantly a service industry, today takes up 16 percent (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2010) of our GDP and we can’t really expand that percentage much without hurting our international competitiveness – or so we are told and believe. We are, therefore, in a conundrum.
Millions of Americans today receive health care for mental or substance-use problems and illnesses. These conditions are the leading cause of combined disability and death of women and the second highest of men. Effective treatments exist and continually improve. However, deficiencies in care delivery prevent many from receiving appropriate treatments. That situation has serious consequences. A previous IOM report, Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century (2001), put forth a strategy for improving health care overall. However, health care for mental and substance-use conditions has a number of distinctive characteristics. This report examines those differences, finds that the Quality Chasm framework is applicable to health care for mental and substance-use conditions, and describes a multifaceted and comprehensive strategy to do so. The strategy addresses issues pertaining to health care for both mental and substance-use conditions and the essential role that health care for both plays in improving overall health and health care. In doing so it details the actions required to achieve those ends-actions required of clinicians; health care organizations; health plans; purchasers; state, local, and federal governments; and all parties involved in health care for mental and substance-use conditions.