FYI
David
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ruggiero, Mrs. Ana Lucia (WDC) [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 20 March 2001 15:19
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Paper: Medical out-of-pocket spending in poverty thresholds
>
>
> Medical out-of-pocket spending in poverty thresholds
>
> Richard Bavier
> Poverty Measurement Working Papers
> U.S. Census Bureau, October 2000
>
> Available online at:
> <http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povmeas/papers/altmoop.html>
>
> "...........Of all the recommendations and suggestions in the National
> Research Council's report, Measuring Poverty, A New Approach, probably the
> most controversial has been the proposal that medical needs not be
> included in the "basic bundle" of food, clothing, shelter, and "a little
> more" making up the recommended poverty budget.
>
> Rather, medical needs were to be the subject of a "medical care risk"
> index to be developed separated. Because medical needs were not to be
> included in the poverty budget, the panel also recommended that spending
> out-of-pocket on such needs be subtracted before each family's resources
> were tested against the thresholds. The report included estimates of
> poverty rates based on the panel's recommendations.
>
> Two options for including amounts for medical out-of-pocket spending
> (moop) in poverty thresholds like those proposed by the
> National Research Council are presented. Using an experimental poverty
> dataset made available to the public by the Bureau of the
> Census, poverty rates are calculated under each option, with few large
> differences resulting. Compared to the NRC's proposal,
> poverty among the aged is lower under both options, but higher than under
> the current poverty measure........"
>
>
> _____
>
> PAHO/WHO Website:
> <http://www.paho.org/English/HDP/equidad-list-about.htm>
> EQUIDAD List - Archives: <http://listserv.paho.org/Archives/equidad.html>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|