Submission of Draft Evaluation Design. The State must submit to CMS for approval a draft evaluation design for an overall evaluation of the Demonstration no later than 120 days after CMS’ approval of the Demonstration. At a minimum, the draft design must include a discussion of the goals and objectives set forth in section II of these STCs, as well as the specific hypotheses that are being tested, including those indicators that focus specifically on the target populations and the public health outcomes generated from the use of Demonstration funds. The draft design must discuss the outcome measures that will be used in evaluating the impact of the Demonstration during the period of approval. It must discuss the data sources and sampling methodology for assessing these outcomes. The draft evaluation design must include a detailed analysis plan that describes how the effects of the Demonstration must be isolated from other initiatives occurring in the State. The draft design must identify whether the State will conduct the evaluation, or select an outside contractor for the evaluation.
Submission of Draft Evaluation Design. The State shall submit to CMS for approval within 120 days from the award of the Demonstration extension a draft evaluation design which includes how the State will evaluate the medical home component of the Demonstration. At a minimum, the draft design must include a discussion of the goals, objectives, and specific hypotheses that are being tested, including those that focus specifically on the target populations for the Demonstration. The draft design must discuss the outcome measures that shall be used in evaluating the impact of the Demonstration during the period of approval, particularly among the target population. It shall discuss the data sources and sampling methodology for assessing these outcomes. The draft evaluation design must include a detailed analysis plan that describes how the effects of the Demonstration shall be isolated from other initiatives occurring in the State. The draft design must identify whether the State will conduct the evaluation, or select an outside contractor for the evaluation. ACCOMPLISHED.
Submission of Draft Evaluation Design. The State must submit to CMS for approval a draft evaluation design for an overall evaluation of the demonstration no later than 60 days after the approval of the demonstration. At a minimum, the draft design must include the following:
Submission of Draft Evaluation Design. The State shall submit to CMS for approval, within 120 days from the award of the Demonstration, a draft evaluation design. At a minimum, the draft design must include a discussion of the goals, objectives, and specific hypotheses that are being tested, including those that focus specifically on the target populations for the Demonstration. The evaluation design must also include a discussion of the goals, objectives, and effectiveness of data mining activities performed by the MFCU. The data mining component of the evaluation design must include but not be limited to the number and quality of cases opened, and the number of fraud-related convictions and recoveries. The draft design must discuss the outcome measures that shall be used in evaluating the impact of the Demonstration during the period of approval. It shall discuss the data sources and sampling methodology for assessing these outcomes. The draft evaluation design must include a detailed analysis plan that describes how the effects of the Demonstration shall be isolated from other initiatives occurring in the State. The draft design must identify whether the State will conduct the evaluation, or select an outside contractor for the evaluation.
Submission of Draft Evaluation Design. The state shall submit to CMS for approval, within 120 days from the amended demonstration, an amended draft evaluation design. At a minimum, the draft design must include a discussion of the goals, objectives, and specific hypotheses that are being tested, including those that focus specifically on the target populations for the demonstration. The amended draft design must discuss the outcome measures that shall be used in evaluating the impact of the demonstration during the period of approval, particularly among the target population. The amended draft evaluation design shall include items such as new payment methodology, delivery systems, and the population. It shall discuss the data sources and sampling methodology for assessing these outcomes. The draft evaluation design must include a detailed analysis plan that describes how the effects of the demonstration shall be isolated from other initiatives occurring in the state. The amended draft design must identify whether the state will conduct the evaluation, or select an outside contractor for the evaluation. The state shall ensure that the draft evaluation design will address the following evaluation questions and topics:
Submission of Draft Evaluation Design. The state must submit a Draft Evaluation Design for an overall evaluation of the demonstration to CMS for review and approval within 120 days of CMS approval of the demonstration. At a minimum, the Draft Evaluation Design must include the specific research questions and hypotheses that are being tested, as outlined in Section II of the STCs and in STC 58(a). Addressing the research questions identified in these STCs will require a mix of quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. It must also include: a description of the proposed baseline and comparison groups, as well as the methodologies for drawing population samples; qualitative and quantitative process, improvement, and outcome measures; and a discussion of data sources, including relevant enrollment systems, health information technology, claims processing systems, and encounter data systems. The state should describe which systems will be used as their sources of, and the frequency by which they will collect, the relevant data. The state must also provide a detailed analysis plan that describes the statistical methods that will be employed to isolate the effects of the demonstration from other initiatives occurring in the state. The Draft Evaluation Design must describe the state’s process to contract with an independent evaluator. In addition to any qualitative analysis, the evaluation must be based on a quasi-experimental design. Baseline and comparison groups must be established for both AFDC-related (TANF- related) and SSI-related beneficiaries. In addition, the AFDC-related and SSI-related populations must be further stratified by qualifying condition. Sampling and analytical methodologies must take into account the counties, delivery system, and period of enrollment. In its review of the Draft Evaluation Design, CMS reserves the right to request additional levels of analysis.
Submission of Draft Evaluation Design. A draft evaluation design report must be submitted to CMS for approval within 120 days from the award of the Demonstration extension. At a minimum, the evaluation design should include a detailed analysis plan that describes how the effects of the Demonstration will be isolated from those of other initiatives occurring in the State. The evaluation must include an analysis of the costs and benefits of the utilization of point-of-service eligibility. The report should also include an integrated presentation and discussion of the specific hypotheses (including those that focus specifically on the target population for the Demonstration) that are being tested. The report will also discuss the outcome measures that will be used in evaluating the impact of the Demonstration, particularly among the target population. It will also discuss the data sources and sampling methodology for assessing these outcomes. The State must implement the evaluation design and report its progress in each of the Demonstration’s quarterly and annual reports.
Submission of Draft Evaluation Design. A draft evaluation design report must be submitted to CMS for approval within 120 days from the award of the Demonstration. At a minimum, the evaluation design should include a detailed analysis plan that describes how the effects of the Demonstration will be isolated from those of other initiatives occurring in the State. The report should also include an integrated presentation and discussion of the specific hypotheses (including those that focus specifically on the target population for the Demonstration) that are being tested. The report will also discuss the outcome measures that will be used in evaluating the impact of the Demonstration, particularly among the target population. It will also discuss the data sources and sampling methodology for assessing these outcomes. The State must implement the evaluation design and report its progress in each of the Demonstration’s quarterly and annual reports. The evaluation design must be based on a quasi-experimental design. In addition, the experimental and control groups must exhibit baseline equivalence on the following characteristics: (1) the parent or baby’s race and ethnicity; and (2) socioeconomic status. The State must ensure that the draft evaluation design will address the following evaluation questions:
