Behavioral health funding for native Americans in Arizona: Policy implications for states and tribes

Articles

Abstract

This article examines the principal structures and mechanisms used by federal and state government to fund the behavioral health needs of Native American Indians. Using Arizona as a case study, the article provides an overview of both federal and state programs, especially Medicaid, discussing the problems and strengths of each. The article concludes with a discussion of the policy implications of these programs for both states and tribes, focusing on issues concerning administrative complexity, tribal sovereignty, improving behavioral health services, and assignment of financial risk.

Keywords

Public Health Health Service Health Promotion Health Psychology Disease Prevention 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    1997 Trends in Indian Health. Rockville, MD: Indian Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gustafson JS: Priority areas: Introduction to dual diagnosis. In: Bear MB, Flaherty MJ (Eds.):The Continuing Journey of Native American People Impacted by Serious Mental Illness: Building Hope. Boulder, CO: Wiche, 1995, pp. 31–32.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nelson SH, McCoy GF, Stetter M, Vanderwagen WC: An overview of mental health services for American Indians and Alaska natives in the 1990s.Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1992; 43:257–261.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Indian Health Service:Report to Congressional Requestors. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accounting Office, 1992.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aday LA:At Risk in America. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smith SR, Lipsky M:Nonprofits for Hire: The Welfare State in the Age of Contracting. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Arizona Department of Economic Security Population Statistics. Census Summary Tape 1A File. Phoenix, AZ, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kunitz SJ: The history and politics of U.S. health care policy for American Indians and Alaskan natives.American Journal of Public Health 1996; 86:1464–1473.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation:A Forum on the Implications of Changes in the Health Care Environment for Native American Health Care. Menlo Park, CA, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schneider A, Martinez J:Native Americans and Medicaid: Coverage and Financing Issues. Washington, DC: The Kaiser Commission on the Future of Medicaid, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Joseph-Fox Y: Managed care for mental health and substance abuse in Indian country. In: Bear MB, Flaherty MJ (Eds.):The Continuing Journey of Native American People Impacted by Serious Mental Illness: Building Hope. Boulder, CO: Wiche, 1995, pp. 39–47.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Provan KG, Milward HB: Integration of community-based services for the severely mentally ill and the structure of public funding.Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 1994; 19:865–894.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Provan KG, Milward HB, Roussin, K.: Network evolution to a system of managed care for adults with serious mental illness: A case study of the Tucson experiment. In: Morrissey JP (Ed.):Research in Community and Mental Health, Vol. 10. Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1998, pp. 89–113.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cohen FS:Handbook of Federal Indian Law. Charlottesville, VA: Bobbs-Merrill, 1982.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wellever A, Hill G, Casey M: Commentary: Medicaid reform issues affecting the Indian health care system.American Journal of Public Health 1998; 88:193–195.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavioral Healthcare Management 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Public Administration and Policy, McClelland HallUniversity of ArizonaTucson
  2. 2.the Arizona Prevention Center at the University of ArizonaUSA

Personalised recommendations