- Tobacco use kills over 400,000 Americans annually and costs nearly $100 billion in health care costs, while tobacco companies spend over $12 billion on marketing. Comprehensive tobacco prevention programs are proven to reduce smoking and help smokers quit.
- States collect over $25 billion annually from tobacco taxes and settlements, yet fund tobacco prevention programs at only a fraction of the recommended levels. Increasing funding of these programs to CDC-recommended levels would cost less than 15% of current tobacco revenues and save lives.
- Studies show that increased investment in tobacco prevention programs significantly reduces youth and adult smoking rates, as well as saving states money through lower tobacco-related healthcare costs over time. States should uphold their commitment to use tobacco
Fqhc statistics growth, region, performance and revenue - federally qualifi...GaryRichards30
According to Medicare and Medicaid statutes, an FQHC is a health center that receives federal funding under Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act to provide comprehensive primary care services to uninsured and underinsured populations.
Health centers originated under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 as “neighborhood health centers”. Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act established the Health Center Program, which provides federal funding for health centers. It also provided federal grants to community and migrant health centers to serve the uninsured. The FQHC program of today was enacted under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1989 and expanded under OBRA of 1990. The legislation provided cost-based reimbursements to health centers for Medicare and Medicaid services specified under Section 330.
Fqhc statistics growth, region, performance and revenue - federally qualifi...GaryRichards30
According to Medicare and Medicaid statutes, an FQHC is a health center that receives federal funding under Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act to provide comprehensive primary care services to uninsured and underinsured populations.
Health centers originated under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 as “neighborhood health centers”. Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act established the Health Center Program, which provides federal funding for health centers. It also provided federal grants to community and migrant health centers to serve the uninsured. The FQHC program of today was enacted under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1989 and expanded under OBRA of 1990. The legislation provided cost-based reimbursements to health centers for Medicare and Medicaid services specified under Section 330.
A webinar presentation by Geoffrey Plague, Independent Sector, to the chief development officers from National Health Council member organizations. October 3, 2011
Sen. Don Harmon and Rep. Camille Lilly held a town hall meeting in Oak Park to share information and answer questions on the Senate’s budget plan and the status of budget negotiations in Springfield.
Rich States, Poor States Rankings, 9th EditionALEC
The 2016 state economic rankings for the ninth edition of Rich States, Poor States from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) track economic trends across the country.
For more information, visit alec.org
This presentation covers national legislative update and state updates specific to employers headquartered in Oregon, Washington, and Montanta. Additionally, we will address recent events including the potential impact of the new tax plan on employee benefits, EEOC wellness rules updates and updates to the ACA.
For further information, please contact The Partners Group:
https://www.tpgrp.com/contact-partner...
For over 35 years The Partners Group has been serving the financial and insurance needs of employers, medical professionals, and successful individuals with services including employee benefits and business consulting, retirement planning, investment services, commercial and individual insurance. We have built our business from the ground up to ensure we are a thriving organization for the next 35 years. Although we have developed a national network and reputation, you can count on our local commitment and service. We deliver through the hard work of over 140 teammates, who tirelessly provide results greater than the sum of our parts. The Partners Group has offices in Portland, Lake Oswego, and Bend OR; Bellevue, WA; and Bozeman, MT. https://www.tpgrp.com
Subscribe to our email list for additional helpful tips:
https://www.tpgrp.com/subscribe/
A webinar presentation by Geoffrey Plague, Independent Sector, to the chief development officers from National Health Council member organizations. October 3, 2011
Sen. Don Harmon and Rep. Camille Lilly held a town hall meeting in Oak Park to share information and answer questions on the Senate’s budget plan and the status of budget negotiations in Springfield.
Rich States, Poor States Rankings, 9th EditionALEC
The 2016 state economic rankings for the ninth edition of Rich States, Poor States from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) track economic trends across the country.
For more information, visit alec.org
This presentation covers national legislative update and state updates specific to employers headquartered in Oregon, Washington, and Montanta. Additionally, we will address recent events including the potential impact of the new tax plan on employee benefits, EEOC wellness rules updates and updates to the ACA.
For further information, please contact The Partners Group:
https://www.tpgrp.com/contact-partner...
For over 35 years The Partners Group has been serving the financial and insurance needs of employers, medical professionals, and successful individuals with services including employee benefits and business consulting, retirement planning, investment services, commercial and individual insurance. We have built our business from the ground up to ensure we are a thriving organization for the next 35 years. Although we have developed a national network and reputation, you can count on our local commitment and service. We deliver through the hard work of over 140 teammates, who tirelessly provide results greater than the sum of our parts. The Partners Group has offices in Portland, Lake Oswego, and Bend OR; Bellevue, WA; and Bozeman, MT. https://www.tpgrp.com
Subscribe to our email list for additional helpful tips:
https://www.tpgrp.com/subscribe/
Unit 3 Project Information Resources are relatively scarc.docxdickonsondorris
Unit 3 Project Information
Resources are relatively scarce related to wants. To strike a balance between scarce resources
and unlimited wants involves making choices. Medical decisions involve costs and benefits. It is
important to strike a balance between incremental benefits and costs. Decision making is
seldom based on an all or nothing situation, but usually involves tradeoffs. For example, if we
are to spend more on MRIs, than we need to spend a little less on mental health services.
There is a strong and growing interest among public health professionals in the broader societal
trends and policies that affect physical activity behavior. Policies can be defined as laws,
regulations, and rules (both formal and informal). Polices can be directed toward creating
supportive environments and can also have direct effects on behavior by providing the basis for
educational and behavior change programs, for instance. Overall there are a variety of factors
that play a role in obesity. This makes it a complex health issue to address. This section will
address how behavior, environment, and genetic factors may have an effect in causing people to
be overweight and obese.
The Surgeon General's Call to Action to Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity 2001
identified action steps for several locations that may help prevent and decrease obesity and
overweight. The following table provides some examples of these steps.
Location Steps to Help Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity
Home • Reduce time spent watching television and in other sedentary behaviors
• Build physical activity into regular routines
Schools • Ensure that the school breakfast and lunch programs meet nutrition
standards
• Provide food options that are low in fat, calories, and added sugars
• Provide all children, from prekindergarten through grade 12, with quality
daily physical education
Work • Create more opportunities for physical activity at work sites
Community • Promote healthier choices including at least 5 servings of fruits and
vegetables a day, and reasonable portion sizes
Encourage the food industry to provide reasonable food and beverage
portion sizes
Encourage food outlets to increase the availability of low-calorie,
nutritious food items
Create opportunities for physical activity in communities
Overweight and obesity and their associated health problems have a significant economic
impact on the U.S. health care system (USDHHS, 2001). According to a study of national costs
attributed to both overweight (BMI 25–29.9) and obesity (BMI greater than 30), medical
expenses accounted for 9.1 percent of total U.S. medical expenditures in 1998 and may have
reached as high as $78.5 billion ($92.6 billion in 2002 dollars) (Finkelstein, Fiebelkorn, and
Wang, 2003). Approximately half of these costs were paid by Medicaid and Medicare.
Table 1 shows the estimated percentage of total, Medicare, and Medicaid adult medic ...
Innovative Mechanisms for Raising Revenue for the Health Sector in The Domini...HFG Project
This brief presents projections of the revenue that could be collected through five financing mechanisms. This information will support the Government of the Dominican Republic in deciding which mechanisms to implement. It is important to consider that taxes on the consumption of soft drinks, alcohol and tobacco have a twofold advantage because they not only collect resources for the health sector, but they are also associated with a reduction in consumption of these products, thus benefiting the health of the population.
Preventing Tobacco Use in Nebraska: How Tobacco Prevention Programs and Price...Cindy Jeffrey
Nebraska's tobacco prevention program and quit tobacco program has a key role in reducing tobacco use in Nebraska. Price increases also are effective in reducing tobacco use. This presentation provides details.
Dedication
Thank Dr. Cynthia Lanier who has made it possible for us to finish this project.
We would like to thank our colleagues for their constructive contributions in this quarter.
Thank you all
1. Tobacco Prevention Funding – Key Message Points
(You can replace national data with state-specific data from table on page 3)
• Tobacco use kills more than 400,000 Americans every year and costs the nation almost
$100 billion in health care costs annually – much of it borne by taxpayers. Nearly 90
percent of smokers began as kids, and about 4,000 kids try their first cigarette every
day. Another 1000 kids become regular smokers each day, and one-third of them will
die a premature death as a result. Comprehensive tobacco prevention and cessation
programs are a proven method of preventing kids from starting to smoke and helping
adult smokers quit.
• The states take in more than $25 billion annually in tobacco taxes and tobacco
settlement payments. It just makes sense to use some of this money on programs to
prevent kids from smoking and helping smokers quit. It would take less than fifteen
percent of this money for every state to fund tobacco prevention programs at the level
recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
• It is critical that we fund tobacco prevention programs to keep kids from smoking
because the tobacco companies are spending record amounts marketing their deadly
products. The most recent data show the tobacco companies spend over $12 billion
each year on marketing and promotion, much of which influences kids to smoke. And a
Harvard School of Public Health study found that the tobacco companies have secretly
and significantly increased the levels of nicotine in cigarette smoke since 1998.
• The evidence is clear that tobacco prevention programs work to reduce smoking, save
lives and save money by reducing tobacco-related health care costs. Studies have
shown that the more states spend on tobacco prevention, the lower the youth smoking
rates and overall tobacco use.
• There is overwhelming evidence from states around the country that tobacco prevention
programs work to reduce smoking, improve health and save lives. Maine, which ranked
first in funding tobacco prevention programs from 2002 to 2007, has reduced smoking by
54 percent among high school students since 1997. Washington State, another well-
funded prevention program, has cut youth smoking by 50 percent among and adult
smoking by a third since its program began. Studies show California’s program, started
in 1990, has helped save tens of thousands of lives by reducing smoking-caused heart
disease, lung cancer and other diseases.
• It’s only right that states use tobacco money to fight the tobacco problem. At the time of
the $246 billion state tobacco settlement, states promised to use the money to fund
programs to prevent kids from starting to smoke and help smokers quit. Unfortunately,
most states have broken that promise. It’s not too late for states to keep their promise
and fund tobacco prevention, especially since most states have increased tobacco taxes
since the settlement and collect record amounts of tobacco revenue each year (in fiscal
year 2011, the states will collect $25.3 billion in tobacco-generated revenue).
• Tobacco prevention programs are also a smart investment for states that save money by
reducing smoking-caused health care costs. Tobacco use costs the nation – and the
states – $96 billion a year in health care costs. That includes more than $30 billion a
year in Medicaid costs, much of it paid by states and their taxpayers. In the short-term,
2. the best state tobacco prevention programs have saved $3 in health care costs for every
dollar spent. These savings grow sharply over time.
• Policymakers are in a unique position on this issue. We know the problem caused by
tobacco. We know that comprehensive prevention and cessation programs are a critical
part of the solution. We have a clear revenue source to fund the solution. And, the
public overwhelmingly supports using tobacco revenue for tobacco prevention. All we
need is the political will to act.
4. State
Adult
Smoking-
Caused
Deaths
Annual
Smoking-
Caused
Healthcare
Costs
Kids who
try
smoking
per year
New
youth
smokers
per year
Total Annual
State
Revenues
From Tobacco
FY2011
% Of Revenue
Needed to
Fund at CDC
Level
Tobacco
Industry
Spending
Annual Smoking
Caused
Medicaid Health
Costs
CDC
Annual
Spending
Target
North Carolina 12,200 $2.46 bill. 44,100 11,900 $423 25.2% $535.9 $769.0 $106.8
North Dakota 800 $247 2,600 700 $56 16.6% $32.3 $47.0 $9.3
Ohio 18,500 $4.37 bill. 66,800 18,100 $1.2 bill. 12.4% $556.7 $1.4 bill. $145.0
Oklahoma 6,200 $1.16 bill. 19,900 5,400 $379 11.9% $213.1 $218.0 $45.0
Oregon 4,900 $1.11 bill. 16,900 4,600 $313 13.7% $137.0 $287.0 $43.0
Pennsylvania 20,000 $5.19 bill. 68,400 18,500 $1.5 bill. 10.5% $533.9 $1.7 bill. $155.5
Rhode Island 1,600 $506 5,300 1,400 $184 8.3% $35.1 $179.0 $15.2
South Carolina 6,100 $1.09 bill. 23,400 6,300 $235 26.5% $282.6 $393.0 $62.2
South Dakota 1,000 $274 4,100 1,100 $88 12.8% $37.0 $58.0 $11.3
Tennessee 9,700 $2.16 bill. 30,100 8,100 $428 16.8% $405.5 $680.0 $71.7
Texas 24,500 $5.83 bill. 115,100 31,200 $1.8 bill. 14.4% $854.2 $1.6 bill. $266.3
Utah 1,100 $345 6,000 1,600 $147 16.1% $58.7 $104.0 $23.6
Vermont 800 $233 2,800 700 $103 10.1% $27.4 $72.0 $10.4
Virginia 9,200 $2.08 bill. 34,700 9,400 $297 34.7% $411.3 $401.0 $103.2
Washington 7,600 $1.95 bill. 28,200 7,600 $593 11.3% $146.0 $651.0 $67.3
West Virginia 3,800 $690 10,300 2,800 $185 15.0% $140.4 $229.0 $27.8
Wisconsin 7,200 $2.02 bill. 29,400 7,900 $840 7.7% $274.0 $480.0 $64.3
Wyoming 700 $136 2,600 700 $46 19.6% $27.6 $37.0 $9.0
Sources:
Adult deaths and Annual smoking-caused healthcare costs: CDC, State Data Highlights 2006,
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/state_data/data_highlights/2006/index.htm; CDC, "State-Specific Smoking-Attributable Mortality and Years of Potential
Life Lost – United States, 2000-2004," (MMWR) 58(2), January 22, 2009. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/wk/mm5802.pdf
New youth smokers. Estimate based on U.S. Dept of Health & Human Services (HHS), “Summary Findings from the 2009 Nat’l Survey on Drug Use and Health,”
http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k9NSDUH/2k9ResultsP.pdf
State Revenue from tobacco: The state settlement revenues include the tobacco settlement bonus payments expected to be included in annual MSA payments
made to states in April 2011. Estimated state tobacco tax revenue amounts are based on monthly Tax Burden on Tobacco data, state agencies, and conservative
projections using the most recent data available.
Tobacco industry spending: U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Cigarette Report for 2006, 2009, http://ftc.gov/os/2009/08/090812cigarettereport.pdf. See
also, FTC, Smokeless Tobacco Report for the Year 2006, 2009, http://ftc.gov/os/2009/08/090812smokelesstobaccoreport.pdf. Data for top 5 manufacturers only.
CDC Annual Spending Target: CDC, Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control, October 2007.
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/tobacco_control_programs/stateandcommunity/best_practices/index.htm. See also, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, et al., A
Decade of Broken Promises: The 1998 State Tobacco Settlement Twelve Years Later, 2010, http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/reports/settlements/.