Medicaid Cut Vulnerability Index Shows Which Kentucky Counties Are Most at Risk

🌎 Resumen en español · traducción automática

El presupuesto estatal de Kentucky aprobado recientemente subfinancia Medicaid, lo que resultará en cortes del 4% en las tasas de pago a proveedores, mientras que la Ley One Big Beautiful Bill del Congreso reducirá aún más el número de personas cubiertas y los pagos a hospitales. Estos cortes afectarán a los kentuckianos al reducir el acceso a servicios de Medicaid y disminuir la actividad económica en las comunidades, siendo los condados del este y sur de Kentucky los más vulnerables según un índice que mide la dependencia de la población en Medicaid y el peso de los pagos de Medicaid en la economía local.

Traducción y resumen generados por IA a partir del artículo en inglés. Puede contener errores; consulte el texto original.

The Kentucky General Assembly recently enacted a new state budget that underfunds Medicaid relative to the agency’s request, resulting in the administration announcing 4% cuts in the payment rates to Medicaid providers.  In addition, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) passed by Congress will reduce the number of people receiving Medicaid and the payments to hospitals and other providers. 

These cuts will harm Kentuckians in two ways. First, they will reduce the number of people receiving Medicaid-funded services and the types of services that are available to them. These reductions will happen as individuals are taken off the rolls and as certain providers no longer take Medicaid, are forced to reduce the services they offer or close altogether. Second, they will reduce economic activity as fewer dollars flow into communities to pay nurses, therapists, physicians and other health care workers. 

While Kentuckians across the state will be hurt by these cuts, residents of some counties will be harmed more than others. The map below contains an index of vulnerability to Medicaid cuts based on two factors: 1) the share of the population covered by Medicaid; and 2) Medicaid payments to providers located in the county as a share of county gross domestic product (GDP). In different ways, these two factors estimate a county’s risk by looking at how much the population relies on Medicaid for health care and how much the local economy depends on Medicaid dollars due to the presence of clinics, hospitals and other providers.1

The counties with the highest vulnerability to Medicaid cuts are all in eastern and southern Kentucky. The localities listed below rank in the top 20% of Kentucky counties for the share of the population covered by Medicaid and for Medicaid spending as a share of economic activity: 

  • Breathitt
  • Clay
  • Floyd
  • Harlan
  • Knox
  • Lee
  • Leslie
  • Letcher
  • Menifee
  • Owsley
  • Perry
  • Wayne
  • Whitley
  • Wolfe 

While it is no surprise that these rural counties have the highest share of people covered by Medicaid, it is notable that they also rank among the highest in the economic importance of Medicaid spending. Although specialty health services tend to be located in larger cities, Medicaid providers are spread throughout the state and matter deeply to rural economies. Kentucky has 35 rural hospitals at heightened financial risk from these cuts (including closure), the most of any state. 

All counties, but especially those in rural and eastern Kentucky, face the double threat of worse health and a weaker economy if state and federal decision makers allow these cuts to continue.

Medicaid Cut Vulnerability Index

County People with Medicaid Medicaid coverage as share of pop. Coverage Index Medicaid spending Medicaid spending as share of GDP Spending Index Total Index
Owsley 2,752 68.8% 5 $15,827,793 23.0% 5 10
Wolfe 3,954 62.9% 5 $17,227,888 10.9% 5 10
Knox 17,941 60.2% 5 $114,268,741 13.7% 5 10
Bell 13,848 59.4% 5 $71,883,920 7.2% 4 9
Clay 11,585 59.0% 5 $74,742,629 16.4% 5 10
Harlan 14,233 56.2% 5 $75,792,967 10.0% 5 10
McCreary 9,507 55.8% 5 $26,979,964 9.3% 4 9
Magoffin 6,255 55.7% 5 $30,994,724 8.9% 4 9
Breathitt 6,802 52.5% 5 $34,659,346 11.3% 5 10
Whitley 19,285 52.4% 5 $230,276,423 14.8% 5 10
Knott 7,099 52.0% 5 $18,752,666 6.8% 4 9
Perry 14,063 51.8% 5 $267,846,276 20.7% 5 10
Clinton 4,715 51.5% 5 $14,014,952 3.0% 2 7
Floyd 17,650 51.3% 5 $229,447,514 16.4% 5 10
Leslie 5,003 50.7% 5 $24,335,506 12.4% 5 10
Cumberland 3,034 50.6% 5 $15,020,468 5.9% 4 9
Letcher 10,252 50.2% 5 $71,028,964 13.2% 5 10
Menifee 3,148 50.1% 5 $11,821,120 10.3% 5 10
Jackson 6,559 50.1% 5 $13,367,452 6.5% 4 9
Wayne 9,766 49.9% 5 $58,911,848 10.5% 5 10
Lee 3,497 48.0% 5 $14,950,753 9.3% 5 10
Adair 9,108 47.3% 5 $53,038,499 9.3% 4 9
Powell 6,021 46.4% 5 $19,479,185 5.8% 4 9
Martin 5,058 46.3% 5 $14,890,645 7.0% 4 9
Lewis 5,982 46.1% 4 $16,200,367 6.4% 4 8
Estill 6,354 45.6% 4 $23,826,448 8.2% 4 8
Rockcastle 7,314 45.2% 4 $74,966,379 17.4% 5 9
Johnson 9,945 45.0% 4 $44,389,998 7.2% 4 8
Bath 5,832 44.9% 4 $15,855,403 6.1% 4 8
Casey 6,971 43.8% 4 $55,417,209 11.5% 5 9
Metcalfe 4,587 43.8% 4 $36,124,241 14.2% 5 9
Lawrence 6,974 43.6% 4 $67,314,286 12.5% 5 9
Pulaski 28,510 43.1% 4 $403,539,278 13.3% 5 9
Russell 7,869 43.0% 4 $61,433,801 5.8% 4 8
Laurel 27,052 42.7% 4 $168,796,413 5.7% 3 7
Pike 23,853 42.6% 4 $225,590,814 8.5% 4 8
Fulton 2,689 42.4% 4 $7,962,566 2.8% 2 6
Carter 11,092 42.1% 4 $42,728,687 6.4% 4 8
Washington 5,099 41.6% 4 $24,701,836 5.3% 3 7
Butler 4,983 40.3% 4 $18,645,942 4.6% 3 7
Monroe 4,536 40.1% 4 $16,606,766 3.7% 3 7
Lincoln 9,892 39.9% 4 $31,051,247 5.2% 3 7
Mason 6,677 39.6% 4 $59,321,564 4.7% 3 7
Elliott 2,870 39.6% 4 $9,509,192 8.6% 4 8
Green 4,426 38.6% 4 $75,166,977 31.5% 5 9
Grayson 10,343 38.6% 4 $49,710,680 5.0% 3 7
Rowan 9,294 38.1% 4 $105,765,237 9.9% 5 9
Fleming 5,874 38.0% 4 $18,229,728 4.2% 3 7
Nicholas 2,919 38.0% 3 $3,982,057 3.0% 2 5
Montgomery 10,604 37.2% 3 $79,622,219 5.8% 4 7
Carroll 4,067 37.0% 3 $16,651,231 0.7% 1 4
Taylor 9,740 36.8% 3 $94,234,554 8.1% 4 7
Ohio 8,691 36.8% 3 $43,790,481 4.1% 3 6
Hickman 1,634 36.7% 3 $10,307,565 3.7% 3 6
Hart 7,244 36.7% 3 $22,127,272 2.6% 2 5
Muhlenberg 11,122 36.4% 3 $47,025,751 3.0% 2 5
Morgan 5,183 36.3% 3 $18,709,463 5.0% 3 6
Edmonson 4,448 35.7% 3 $13,798,873 5.5% 3 6
Garrard 6,346 35.6% 3 $11,361,117 2.6% 2 5
Boyd 16,860 35.3% 3 $231,013,716 6.1% 4 7
Carlisle 1,643 34.9% 3 $5,307,063 2.0% 1 4
Barren 15,615 34.7% 3 $129,689,090 6.9% 4 7
Graves 12,601 34.6% 3 $70,533,543 4.0% 3 6
Hopkins 15,449 34.4% 3 $133,759,751 5.0% 3 6
Allen 7,459 34.2% 3 $36,423,007 5.9% 4 7
Grant 8,640 33.7% 3 $30,425,490 3.9% 3 6
Owen 3,798 33.6% 3 $9,432,534 3.6% 2 5
Bourbon 6,758 33.6% 3 $40,241,023 3.1% 2 5
Breckinridge 7,047 33.4% 3 $21,239,952 3.9% 3 6
Caldwell 4,145 33.0% 3 $18,929,094 3.5% 2 5
Jefferson 254,767 33.0% 3 $2,767,838,504 3.5% 2 5
Clark 12,255 32.9% 3 $83,525,261 4.1% 3 6
Warren 46,687 32.8% 2 $435,344,686 3.9% 3 5
Robertson 754 32.6% 2 $4,396,714 10.5% 5 7
Webster 4,142 32.5% 2 $9,662,115 1.8% 1 3
McLean 2,935 32.4% 2 $8,461,666 0.5% 1 3
Larue 4,922 32.2% 2 $24,758,598 7.9% 4 6
Greenup 11,276 32.0% 2 $60,089,121 5.6% 3 5
Henderson 14,045 31.8% 2 $69,372,337 2.5% 2 4
Logan 8,928 31.6% 2 $24,504,033 1.8% 1 3
Bracken 2,654 31.5% 2 $4,503,118 2.1% 1 3
Marion 6,187 31.2% 2 $46,824,185 13.6% 5 7
Harrison 6,053 31.2% 2 $37,280,615 5.2% 3 5
Daviess 32,111 31.0% 2 $349,834,783 5.7% 3 5
Union 4,062 31.0% 2 $17,205,764 1.5% 1 3
Jessamine 16,925 30.8% 2 $79,359,993 2.6% 2 4
Livingston 2,728 30.7% 2 $11,481,794 2.2% 1 3
McCracken 20,513 30.4% 2 $218,539,943 12.4% 5 7
Simpson 6,118 30.3% 2 $28,092,200 2.3% 2 4
Mercer 6,985 30.2% 2 $25,277,506 2.2% 1 3
Todd 3,756 30.1% 2 $10,418,085 1.8% 1 3
Henry 4,777 29.9% 2 $14,388,421 3.0% 2 4
Ballard 2,261 29.8% 2 $6,404,066 1.8% 1 3
Pendleton 4,397 29.7% 2 $8,493,267 2.1% 1 3
Madison 28,416 29.4% 2 $218,892,376 3.1% 2 4
Boyle 8,884 28.7% 2 $106,001,915 6.0% 4 6
Franklin 14,643 28.4% 1 $98,899,040 2.2% 1 2
Gallatin 2,482 28.2% 1 $11,823,561 2.6% 2 3
Christian 20,296 28.2% 1 $161,993,512 2.1% 1 2
Trimble 2,423 28.2% 1 $5,657,725 0.8% 1 2
Trigg 4,037 28.1% 1 $12,016,018 2.6% 2 3
Hardin 31,263 27.8% 1 $338,115,950 4.6% 3 4
Crittenden 2,481 27.6% 1 $9,305,298 3.8% 3 4
Hancock 2,405 27.0% 1 $5,788,630 0.6% 1 2
Marshall 8,367 26.4% 1 $40,796,592 0.9% 1 2
Nelson 12,467 26.1% 1 $71,810,716 3.0% 2 3
Calloway 9,865 25.8% 1 $52,676,958 2.8% 2 3
Oldham 18,029 25.7% 1 $96,743,541 3.2% 2 3
Fayette 81,771 25.5% 1 $1,581,297,593 5.5% 3 4
Anderson 6,058 24.6% 1 $18,534,338 2.3% 2 3
Meade 7,350 24.4% 1 $15,083,930 1.5% 1 2
Kenton 38,972 22.7% 1 $374,577,736 3.0% 2 3
Scott 13,324 22.1% 1 $71,785,913 1.6% 1 2
Bullitt 18,766 22.1% 1 $47,585,938 1.2% 1 2
Shelby 10,285 20.8% 1 $50,614,692 2.1% 1 2
Woodford 5,548 20.3% 1 $20,681,387 1.3% 1 2
Lyon 1,806 19.7% 1 $7,339,579 2.2% 1 2
Boone 27,505 19.6% 1 $203,121,790 1.2% 1 2
Campbell 17,208 18.4% 1 $126,236,900 2.5% 2 3
Spencer 3,615 17.6% 1 $9,971,272 2.2% 2 3

The post Medicaid Cut Vulnerability Index Shows Which Kentucky Counties Are Most at Risk appeared first on Kentucky Center for Economic Policy.


Sources

  1. KY Center for Economic Policy

View in feeds


Founded & published by