Caring for the Uninsured in New York
Document date: October 20, 2006
Released online: October 20, 2006
The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
Read the full report and Appendices in PDF format.
The text below is a portion of the complete document.
In this paper, we estimate the costs of uncompensated care in New York during 2005, along
with the governmental revenues meant to offset those costs. We use two very different
approaches to estimate the amount of uncompensated care provided to uninsured people.
The first uses cost reports from hospitals and diagnostic and treatment centers in New York,
budget figures for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and the Indian Health Service, and
physician survey data to provide an estimate of the amount of uncompensated care reported
by providers. In the second, we use household survey data to provide an alternative estimate
based on the amount of uncompensated care reported by the uninsured themselves. Then, the
third section of this paper estimates how much additional medical care the uninsured would
use if they were fully insured. This is not the same as the cost of a new health plan to cover the
uninsured, but rather the additional resources that would be expended on their medical care if
they had coverage. The final section examines governmental sources of payments for uncompensated
The main results are as follows:
- Using cost reports and physician survey data, we estimate that $2.8 billion of uncompensated
care is provided to the uninsured. Of this, $1.8 billion is provided by hospitals,
and another $412 million is provided by physicians; the remainder is provided by
health centers, Veterans Affairs facilities, and the Indian Health Service.
- Using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel household survey, we estimate that
$2.7 billion in uncompensated care costs is provided to those who are uninsured for
the full year or for the part of the year. Of this, 75 percent is provided to the full-year
uninsured and the remainder to the part-year uninsured.
- Either of these sources could understate the amount of uncompensated care provided
to the uninsured. The $2.8 billion based on cost reports and physician surveys does
not include some uncompensated care provided in hospitals (e.g., skilled nursing
care), as well as free or discounted care provided by pharmacists, pharmaceutical
manufacturers, podiatrists, optometrists, chiropractors, and other providers. Data
from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey is known to understate actual expenditures,
and we have made an adjustment to align the survey data with the National
Health Accounts, but this adjustment could still understate actual expenditures. We
do not anticipate that either source of undercounting would be large, but acknowledge
that the actual level of uncompensated care could be in the neighborhood of
$3.0 billion. The provider reports on uncompensated care do not allow us to separate
costs of the uninsured versus those for people with coverage who do not pay their cost
sharing, for example. Accordingly, the provider-based estimate may overstate uninsured
costs. Despite their imperfections, the two different approaches to estimating
costs yield similar results, which raises confidence in their accuracy.
- We estimate that as of 2005, about $3.5 billion of government funding is transferred
to providers of uninsured care because of their safety net role, as opposed to other
reasons for public subsidy. Payments go mainly to hospitals, but also to clinics. Of this
total, $622 million is provided by state sources, $641 million by local sources, and over
$2.2 billion by the federal government. State and local funding comes through state
bad debt and charity care pools, several Medicaid disproportionate share hospital
(DSH) and upper payment limit (UPL) programs (with local share for local public
hospitals), state public health grants, and direct local support for public hospitals.
Federal support comes as Medicaid matching funds, as well as fully federal contributions
from Medicare's DSH and indirect medical education payments (IME), direct
provision of care by the Veterans Affairs Department and the Indian Health Services,
and through grants such as the Ryan White program and the Maternal and Child
Health block grant.
- This estimate of $3.5 billion does not count all funds that are directed to safety net
hospitals and clinics. We attribute half of the DSH and UPL payments just noted to
Medicaid payment shortfalls, for example. Other programs that subsidize hospitals
are omitted where they are not clearly tied to provision of uncompensated care or
safety net status.
- Our estimates of funding attributable to the uninsured could overstate (or understate)
the amount actually supporting the uninsured. Factors that might change the
amount of estimated subsidy include the following:
-- We have omitted or included programs based on their perceived relationship to
uninsured/uncompensated care, and making different judgments would alter our
-- The share of payments under various programs that we attribute to support for
the uninsured may be smaller or larger than estimated, relative to the share serving
-- The dollars observed going to providers may be offset by changes in other
unobserved funding flows among institutions and governments (which our
analysis does not attempt to capture).
- Some additional funds available to cover uninsured care may come from some
hospitals' financial surpluses (or positive margins), from private payers, and from
philanthropy. However, those hospitals that may have the ability to charge private
payers higher prices in response to bad debt and charity care services or Medicaid
shortfalls typically do not have many uninsured patients and, conversely, those with
large numbers of uninsured people have relatively small private-pay revenues. Interviewees
also said that since deregulation of hospital rates, private payers have not paid
charges very much above cost, as they have in many other states. Moreover, the large
amount of money that can be identifi ed as coming through government suggests that
the amount coming through private sources is relatively small, other than physician
charity through free or reduced-fee care.
- Our estimates of the cost of the additional care that would be provided to the uninsured
if they were insured for the full year is $4.1 billion--$3.0 billion for full-year
uninsured patients and $1.1 billion for the part-year uninsured. This is in addition to
the $7.2 billion already spent by or on behalf of the uninsured, including $2.7-$2.8
billion in uncompensated care. These estimated incremental costs mainly reflect
the additional amounts of care and higher provider payment rates characteristic of
insured people relative to the uninsured. The $4.1 billion amounts to 3.0 percent of
personal health care spending in New York, or 6.2 percent of acute care spending on
the nonelderly. These estimates are not the full costs of a new plan to cover all or most
of the uninsured. Such a plan would also have additional costs from displacing some
private coverage and reducing out-of-pocket spending by individuals and families.
- The estimated revenues attributable to uninsured/uncompensated care exceed the
costs of such care under either estimate of costs by more than half a billion dollars.
This difference is partly created by our estimating that certain revenue streams are
half attributable to uncompensated care, half to Medicaid payment shortfalls. To
keep this finding in perspective, we note that from a provider's view, the estimated
"surplus" on uninsured/uncompensated care is more than offset by the very large
Medicaid shortfall in hospital payment alone. The two hospital shortfalls combined
exceed hospital revenues by over half a billion dollars.
- The costs of uninsurance are a social burden that would be alleviated, but not ended,
by universal coverage. Some support for uncompensated care will continue to be
needed even under universal coverage. Nor will covering the currently uninsured
fix the Medicaid shortfall, whether it is mainly due to high costs or low payments.
Moreover, only a share of current support for uninsured/uncompensated care could
be reallocated to help pay for new insurance. The shift would cause major reallocations
of funds across provider and health plan constituencies and would have major
political repercussions. Moreover, most revenues now come on a voluntary basis from
local government, along with the federal match these contributions attract. Shifting
funds from supporting local medical infrastructure to supporting statewide coverage
expansion could substantially reduce willingness to contribute.
Read the full report in PDF format.
Read the Appendices in PDF format.
Other Publications by the Authors
Usage and reprints: Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site and may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.
Disclaimer: The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute.