skip to content
Primary navigation

Continuing Care performance report

Measure: Percent of long-term care spending for home and community-based services for people with disabilities.

Most people with disabilities, excluding developmental disabilities, who receive services in Minnesota's long-term care programs, get services in community settings instead of going to institutions. These services are called home and community-bases services.

To help track progress, counties similar in size are grouped together and called a "cohort." Cohort 4 includes the group of Minnesota's moderately large counties in terms of population and has the highest percent of spending in HCBS. However, there has been improvement across the other cohorts in the past five years as well.

Why this measure is important?

This measure is important because HCBS are less expensive to provide when people with disabilities can stay in their homes and other HCBS settings. People have more control over their services in HCBS, which promotes their independence. There is less opportunity to control one's services in institutions. People usually choose HCBS.

What is included in the measure?

The measure includes spending for people with disabilities who receive services in institutions and home and community-based services. For the most part, this measure does not include people with developmental disabilities.

What does it mean?

A higher percent means counties spend more of their LTC funding on HCBS. That means there are more people get services in their homes or other HCBS settings. A lower percent means that more people get services in institutions rather than in their communities.

How is it calculated?

The amount spent on HCBS for people with disabilities divided by the total amount spent on people with disabilities who receive HCBS and institutional LTC services.

Percent of LTC spending for HCBS for people with disabilities by graph

Graph of percent of LTC spending for HCBS for people with disabilities

Percent of LTC spending for HCBS for people with disabilities by table / by map (PDF)

Year

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Statewide

87.0%

87.6%

88.4%

88.2%

89.1%

Cohort 1

84.1%

86.5%

86.0%

84.6%

84.9%

Cohort 2

86.5%

86.6%

87.1%

86.3%

87.4%

Cohort 3

88.4%

88.7%

89.8%

88.6%

88.9%

Cohort 4

90.6%

91.4%

91.7%

92.1%

91.5%

Cohort 5

86.2%

86.8%

87.8%

88.0%

89.3%

Data source

DHS Data Warehouse

back to top