; OUTLINE FOR

}

REGIONAL MEDICAL PROGRAM DECISION PAPER

NOTE:

This paper is being developed to
prepare a Departmental position
on RMP on the assumption that
there has been no final decision
to include RMP in Revenue Sharing.
\ |  Of15/72-,
\ OUTLINE FOR ‘

REGIONAL MEDICAL PROGRAM DECISTON PAPER

I. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM

 

II. RMP ALTERNATIVES

A.
MISSTON

ISSUE 1

What should be the future mission(role) of RMP?

Lee

op

é .

A

Qe Option A - Continue as is -- flexible, variable,

broad authority which encourages pro-
viders to use their own initiative to
bring about changes they support.

DO Option B - Restrict Option A to “categorical areas"
(heart, cancer, stroke, kidney):

/ » Option C - Agency responsible for implementing
change in local delivery system (im-
plementing Agency for CHP, NIH, HSMHA,
etc.). (Eliminate restriction on inter-
ference with practice of medicine and
categorical emphasis.)

la) “ Option D - Agency responsible for monitoring quality
of care.
Cy -
FZ Option E - Agency responsible for aiding local
i groups to organize and follow-up review
: t activities aimed at monitoring and

elevating cuolity of care.
oo

 

7 Option LB = Elimina te proaram completely. y
$
Cy Option ¢ on G - Troe ty ct bd? poli” Kine.

ISSUE 2
In order to acedmolish the mission _setected,—shoutd
EME. “be involved ir comtinuing edtication and -train-
ang _of hea ith professionals? }

“ oe

 

 

Option A - Yes.

Option B - Yes, but not to-duplicate efforts of
NIH and BHME.

Option ¢ - No.

Option D -

7 dws Macher”

a
—

B.
FUNDING

LSSUE 3

How should the funds be distributed?
we K garment

ti A - National tition bi oject.
Option ati nal competiti y projec \y wil

| evans

Option B - Formula grant with earmarks.

Option C.- Formula grant without, earmarks

Option BD - Combination of formula with competition

&

' , " . ' j i
“oy | Pu fit cn Cem gh tedean b “4 feet } nant 4
a . i @
Cc.
ADMINISTRATION,

ISSUE 4

From what categories of people snould the law require
representation on the Board?

Option A - Providers, Consumers, Elected Officials,
Low Income Consumers; Third Parties, and

CHP.

Option B ~ Providers, Consumers, Elected Officials,
“and Low Income Consumers.

Option C - Providers, Consumers, Elected Officials,
and CHP.

Option D - Providers, Consumers, and Low Income
Consumers. ,

Option E - Providers.and Consumers.
nF ° J
gh l frends ely

Issue 5
Yet

Should the law prescribe a minimum maser of consumers
—
representatives for each Board?

Option A Yes 20%
Option B - Yes 33 1/3%
Option C - Yes 51% _

No requirement.

1

Option D
oN

- \

LSSUL G ‘, .

a \ | :
a : .

Shovld the Agency be a State governmental agency?

Option A - Yes.

Option B - No. web
ty?
. ; et) |
Option C No, but governor should designate, nur ex

- of Board.

Option D

ISSUE 7

Should the law require RMP to hold public hearings
before it approves, any project?

Son fabwee PbS

Option A - Yes.

Option B - No.

| apt &
Option C = Lhotd ppmer we 5 mt) ade f ww.
Ark CHP tule at he" ‘aed fog) am CAPY Lape

ISSUE 8

Should the law prohibit RMP from funding any project
that has not been approved by the appropriate CHP

review group?

Li 1, OF woe fa oper bal

Option A - Yes. dd
oO e (pte mf LA bn HP? wy Why vob
Option B - No. . ¢ be th oy) AA t Y macned ¢
a 4 rmidly fe LPN 2h pire a
ao,
_ .

ISSUE 9

 

Should the

_ core staff

Option A -
Option B -
Option C -
Option D -
Option E -
Option F -

Option G -

amount of money which can
be limited?

yes 10%

Yes

Yes 30% . . }
Yes

By Law, yes.

By Administration, yes.

No

be used for each