Table 1.
Summary of States Implementing P4P between 2001 and 2009; Implementation Dates; and, Weights Assigned to Clinical Outcomes, Staffing Ratios, and Inspection Deficiencies by Each Program
| State | Dates of Program | Weights Put On: | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical Outcomes | Staffing Ratios | Inspection Deficiencies | ||
| Colorado | 7/2008 to Present | 0.27 (FY 2008) 0.25 (FY 2009) |
0 | Qualifier |
| Georgia | 4/2007 to Present | 0.40 | 0.33 | Qualifier |
| Iowa | 7/2002 to Present | 0 | 0.182 | 0.182 |
| Kansas | 7/2005 to Present | 0 | 0.222 | 0 |
| Minnesota | 10/2006 to 9/2008 | 0.40 (FY 2006) 0.35 (FY 2007) |
0 (FY 2006) 0.10 (FY 2007) |
0.10 |
| Ohio | 7/2006 to Present | 0 | 0.111 | 0.222 |
| Oklahoma | 7/2007 to Present | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.10 |
| Utah | 7/2003 to Present | 0 | 0 | Qualifier |
Notes: Weights can take on values from 0 to 1 inclusive. Other quality measures used in P4P programs include overall occupancy, Medicaid occupancy, consumer satisfaction, and culture change, among others.