Giving Compass' Take:
- Arielle Zionts reports on nonprofits' concerns that the Rural Health Transformation Program needs greater transparency.
- How might the program adapt to effectively ensure funds are reaching the communities they're intended to support?
- Ask a custom question to find other nonprofits focused on rural health care.
What is Giving Compass?
We connect donors to learning resources and ways to support community-led solutions. Learn more about us.
One year into its creation, a $50 billion federal program aimed at improving rural healthcare lacks transparency, which could make it difficult to protect against fraud, identify successful projects, and ensure the program delivers on its promise to transform the system.
Transparency “is really important to help protect the integrity of the program, ensure funds are reaching the communities they’re meant to serve,” said Maya Sandalow, director of health policy for the Bipartisan Policy Center, a nonprofit think tank.
The federal government and states are compelled by public records laws to share documents when requested. But those requests can take months to fulfill, making their release too late for meaningful oversight as states rush to spend their allotments under tight federal deadlines.
In the meantime, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services — which oversees the Rural Health Transformation Program — and some states aren’t proactively sharing information about where the funding is going and how it will be used.
CMS spokesperson Timothy Foster said the agency “will publish an annual report on state progress.”
States’ individual reports to CMS are “intended to be” shared upon request, but the agency won’t be proactively publishing the individual state reports, according to a CMS document.
Foster didn’t respond to questions about whether the agency will share examples of projects that are and aren’t working or create a tracker of funding recipients, award amounts, and what organizations plan to do with their funding — ideas that health and government transparency advocates have requested.
Instead, much of the program’s transparency thus far has been up to state governments, and “the level of details that states have publicized really varies,” said Sandalow, who co-wrote a recent paper on how the federal government can strengthen the rural health program, including through transparency.
Some states are sharing information with lawmakers, holding public meetings, and explaining where organizations plan to invest their money.
Read the full article about the Rural Health Transformation Program by Arielle Zionts at KFF Health News.