Skip Navigation

Strengthening the evidence base for maternal and child health programs

New: MCH Best strategies database for sample ESMs

Evidence Tools
MCH Best. NPM 15: Continuous and Adequate Insurance

MCH Best Logo child and father holding a paper cutout of a house

Strategy. On-Site Medical Practice Care Coordination Services

Approach. Support the development of a care coordination plan by clinics.

Return to main MCH Best page >>

Overview. Care coordination that includes counseling support in accessing health insurance is a crucial tool that ensures appropriate healthcare utilization and quality treatment for children.1

Evidence. Emerging Evidence. There is emerging, recent evidence on the effectiveness of care coordination plans. This strategy has been tested more than once and results trend positive overall. However, more research is needed for conclusive results. Access the peer-reviewed evidence through the MCH Digital Library. (Read more about understanding evidence ratings).

Target Audience. Providers.

Outcome. Percent of children ages 0-17 who are adequately insured. For detailed outcomes related to each study supporting this strategy, click on the peer-reviewed evidence link above and read the "Intervention Results" for each study.

Examples from the Field. There are currently 1 ESMs across all states/jurisdictions that use this strategy directly or intervention components that align with this strategy. Access descriptions of these ESMs through the MCH Digital Library. You can use these ESMs to see how other Title V agencies are addressing the NPM.

Sample ESMs. Using the approach “Support the development of a care coordination plan by clinics,” here are sample ESMs you can use as a model for your own measures using the Results-Based Accountability framework (for suggestions on how to develop programs to support this strategy, see The Role of Title V in Adapting Strategies):

Quadrant 1:
Measuring Quantity of Effort
("What/how much did we do?")

  • Number of clinics statewide with a care coordination plan in place.

Quadrant 2:
Measuring Quality of Effort
("How well did we do it?")

  • Percent of clinics across the state with a care coordination plan in place.

Quadrant 3:
Measuring Quantity of Effect
("Is anyone better off?")

  • Number of patients of clinics with a care coordination plan who obtained insurance coverage.

Quadrant 4:
Measuring Quality of Effect
("How are they better off?")

  • Percent of patients of clinics with a care coordination plan who obtained insurance coverage.

Note. ESMs become stronger as they move from measuring quantity to measuring quality (moving from Quadrants 1 and 3, respectively, to Quadrants 2 and 4) and from measuring effort to measuring effect (moving from Quadrants 1 and 2, respectively, to Quadrants 3 and 4):

Learn More. Read how to create stronger ESMs and how to measure ESM impact more meaningfully through Results-Based Accountability.


Reference:

1Johnson, K. (2010). Managing the “T” in EPSDT Services. The National Academy for State Health Policy.

This project is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under grant number U02MC31613, MCH Advanced Education Policy, $3.5 M. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.