Does Mental Illness Affect Consumer Direction of Community-Based Care? Lessons From the Arkansas Cash and Counseling Program

Purpose: Previous research from the Cash and Counseling Demonstration and Evaluation (CCDE) in Arkansas, New Jersey, and Florida suggests that giving consumers control over their personal care greatly increases their satisfaction and improves their outlook on life. Still, some argue that consumerdirected care may not be appropriate for consumers with intellectual disabilities or mental health diagnoses. This study examined how Cash and Counseling— a new option allowing consumers to manage an individualized budget equivalent to what agencies would have spent on their care—changes the way consumers with mental health diagnoses meet their personal care needs and how that affects their wellbeing. Design and Methods: Using the Arkansas CCDE baseline and the 9-month follow-up data for individuals in the treatment and control groups, we compared and contrasted the experience of elderly consumers with and without mental health diagnoses utilizing logit regression. Results: After examining several outcome measures, including satisfaction with care arrangements and the paid caregiver’s reliability and schedule, unmet needs, and satisfaction with the relationship with paid caregivers, this study found evidence that, from the perspective of consumers, the Cash and Counseling program works well for participants with mental health diagnoses. Implications: Considering the growing need for long-term-care services and the limited resources available, a consumer-directed option makes sense, and it can be a valuable alternative for persons with mental health needs.

On The Choice and Impacts of Innovative International Food Assistance Instruments

The rise of new food assistance instruments, including local and regional procurement, cash, and vouchers, has surpassed increase in understanding of the tradeoffs among and impacts of these options relative to traditional food aid. Response choices rarely appear to result from systematic response analyses. Further, impacts along multiple dimensions-timeliness, cost-effectiveness, local market effects, recipient satisfaction, food quality, impact on smallholder suppliers, etc.-may be competing or synergistic. No single food assistance tool is always and everywhere preferable. A growing body of evidence, including the papers in this special section, nonetheless demonstrates the clear value-added of new food assistance instruments. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The Timeliness and Cost-Effectiveness of the Local and Regional Procurement of Food Aid

Local and regional procurement (LRP) of food aid is often claimed to lead to quicker and more cost-effective response. We generate timeliness and cost-effectiveness estimates by comparing US-funded LRP activities in nine countries against in-kind, transoceanic food aid shipments from the US to the same countries during the same timeframe. Procuring food locally or distributing cash or vouchers results in a time savings of nearly 14 weeks, a 62 percent gain. Cost-effectiveness varies significantly by commodity type. Procuring grains locally saved over 50 percent, on average, while local procurement of processed commodities was not always cost-effective. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.