Rate Adequacy, Specialty Programs, Strategic Levers & Panel Preparation โ Comprehensive National Study for Operator Panel Discussion
August 2026 | All data cited with primary sources
In Plain English
Right now, Idaho pays nursing homes $259 a day to take care of elderly people on Medicaid — that’s less than it actually costs to provide the care, and it’s the 4th lowest rate in the entire country. The formula Idaho uses to figure out this payment is based on rules from 1985 and a system the federal government stopped using in 2019. Because the payment is so low, nursing homes are closing, workers are quitting to go work at Walmart where they can make more money, and elderly people are being moved far away from their families. This bill fixes the payment formula, raises a fee that nursing homes pay (not taxpayers) to unlock $32 million per year in federal money that Idaho is currently leaving on the table, creates bonuses for nursing homes that provide the best care, and starts a fund to train and pay more workers. It would cost the state about $2.80 per person per year — and for every $1 Idaho puts in, the federal government puts in $2.33. Six other states have already done this successfully.
$198
Avg Medicaid Per Diem
ASPE/HHS 2024
82ยข
Per Dollar of Cost
ASPE/HHS 2024
774
Facilities Closed Since 2020
AHCA Access Report 2024
$726
State Rate Spread (TXโAK)
WPS GHA CY2025
40%
Facilities Negative Margin
MedPAC March 2026
Executive Summary
This study compiles current Medicaid skilled nursing facility (SNF) reimbursement rates, supplemental payment programs, rate-setting methodologies, and strategic levers for all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. It was prepared for a national operator panel discussion covering regional perspectives on Medicaid rate adequacy, state philosophies, specialty programs, and tactics to improve reimbursement.
Nationally, Medicaid pays an average of $198 per day against an estimated cost of care of $253 per day โ covering just 82 cents per dollar of actual cost. This chronic underfunding has driven 774 facility closures since 2020, eliminating 62,567 beds and displacing 28,421 residents. Meanwhile, CMS has imposed a staffing mandate requiring 102,000 additional caregivers at an estimated cost of $4.3โ6.8 billion per year โ with no corresponding Medicaid rate increase.
Sources: ASPE/HHS Oct 2024 (82ยข finding); AHCA 2024 Access to Care Report (closures/beds/displaced); MedPAC March 2026 Report Ch.7 (margins); CMS Staffing Mandate Final Rule / AHCA Staffing Mandate Analysis (caregiver estimates)
The Payer Mix Problem
Patient Days vs. Revenue
Medicaid: 63% of patient days โ generates ~42% of revenue Medicare FFS: 8% of patient days โ generates ~14% of revenue (25% margin) Private/Other/MA: 29% of patient days โ generates ~44% of revenue
The structural imbalance: Medicaid dominates census but pays below cost. Medicare generates surplus on a tiny share of days. The cross-subsidy math is fundamentally insufficient.
Source: MedPAC March 2026 Report to Congress, Chapter 7; MedPAC July 2026 Data Book Section 8
Margin Trajectory
Year
All-Payer Total Margin
% Negative Margin
Medicare FFS Margin
2022
-1.4%
โ
โ
2023
0.4%
46%
23%
2024
2.1%
40%
โ
2026 (proj)
โ
โ
25%
Source: MedPAC March 2025 & 2026 Reports to Congress; MedPAC July 2026 Data Book
๐ค 5 "WHAT?!" Statements for the Panel
1
The Geographic Lottery
"Texas pays $148 a day. Alaska pays $874. That's a $726 spread โ same federal program, same populations, same staffing requirements, same CMS mandates. There is no federal Medicaid rate floor. We don't have a national policy โ we have 50 separate funding experiments, and your residents' quality of life depends on which state capitol your building sits closest to."
"Medicare generates a 25% margin โ but it's only 8% of our patient days. Medicaid loses 18 cents on every dollar โ and it's 63% of our days. We're asking 8 profitable customers to subsidize 63 money-losing ones. In any other industry, that's called insolvency. In ours, we call it a business model."
๐ MedPAC March 2026 Report to Congress, Ch. 7; ASPE/HHS 2024
3
The $1.15 Problem
"CMS mandated 102,000 additional caregivers and estimated the cost at $4.3 billion per year โ AHCA says it's closer to $6.8 billion. CMS's investment to support it? $75 million. That's $1.15 for every $100 of unfunded cost they just created. I wouldn't hire a plumber for $1.15 an hour โ and they want us to staff an entire industry with it."
"Since 2020, a nursing home has closed every 2.8 days. 774 facilities gone. 62,567 beds vanished. 28,421 residents displaced โ many into communities where the next available bed is 60 miles away. And one in five of the nursing homes still standing has already closed a unit, wing, or floor because they can't find workers at the rates Medicaid pays."
๐ AHCA 2024 Access to Care Report
5
The Proof Nobody Wants to Hear
"AHCA published a study in February 2026 proving what every operator in this room already knows โ Medicaid funding is directly correlated with nursing home quality. Every state that raised rates saw quality improve. Montana went up 33% and got better outcomes. We've spent decades arguing about whether to fund quality or demand quality. The data says they're the same thing. You cannot regulate your way to quality while paying 82 cents on the dollar."
๐ AHCA Feb 2026 โ "New Study Shows Medicaid Funding Correlated with Nursing Home Quality"; ASPE/HHS 82ยข finding
6
The Provider Tax Magic Trick
"Your facility pays a $10-per-day provider tax. The state takes that $10, draws down $6 to $7 in federal matching funds at your state's FMAP rate, and sends you back $16 to $17. You paid $10 and got $17. Forty-nine out of 51 states use this mechanism, and it's federally protected through October 2026. If your state isn't maximizing provider tax recycling, you're leaving the most secure funding mechanism on the table."
๐ MACPAC Health Care-Related Taxes in Medicaid (2020); MACPAC Non-Federal Financing (2024); AMA OBBB Summary (provider tax protection)
7
The New York Time Warp
"New York's nursing facility Medicaid rates are still based on 2007 cost data. 2007. That's when the iPhone launched. Inflation has increased costs over 50% since then, but the rate base hasn't moved. And yet New York has one of the most complex rate systems in the country โ five payment tiers ranging from $568 to $1,335 a day, all anchored to costs from nearly twenty years ago."
๐ NY DOH Nursing Home Medicaid Rate Files (Jan 2025); NY policy analysis citing 2007 cost base
8
The Ohio Freeze
"Ohio rebases its Medicaid nursing facility rates once every five years. Five years. If your costs go up 4% a year โ which they have โ by year four you're operating on rates that are 17% below current costs. Ohio's cost coverage is 86%. And the state wonders why facilities close."
"Texas has the lowest Medicaid base rate in America โ $148 a day. But Texas also has QIPP โ a quality incentive directed payment program that adds $80 to $110 per day. So the effective rate is $230 to $260. The lesson? Never look at base rates alone. The total Medicaid package โ base plus supplements plus directed payments โ is what actually hits your P&L. And most operators don't know to look for the hidden money."
"CMS says nursing homes need to hire 102,000 additional caregivers to meet the new staffing mandate. There's one problem: those workers don't exist. The national CNA pipeline produces about 30,000 graduates per year. Nursing programs are at capacity. We'd need three-plus years of every single new graduate going exclusively to nursing homes โ no hospitals, no home health, no one leaving โ just to meet the mandate. And that assumes zero attrition."
"When a rural nursing home closes, the nearest bed might be 60 miles away. But here's what nobody talks about: the closure doesn't just affect the nursing home. The local hospital loses its discharge option, so patients back up in acute care beds at $2,500 a day instead of $250. The hospital's costs go up, margins go down, and eventually it closes too. One Medicaid rate cut in a state capitol can cascade into a healthcare desert 200 miles away."
๐ AHCA 2024 Access to Care Report; Rural Health Information Hub; MedPAC hospital discharge analysis
12
The Quality Paradox
"States cut Medicaid rates to save money. Quality goes down. CMS imposes penalties for poor quality. Facilities lose more money. More facilities close. Access gets worse. Remaining facilities fill up, staffing gets stretched, quality drops further. It's a death spiral dressed up as fiscal responsibility. The data from AHCA's February 2026 study proves it โ fund quality and quality improves. Defund it and it collapses. There is no shortcut."
๐ AHCA Feb 2026 โ "New Study Shows Medicaid Funding Correlated with Nursing Home Quality"; MedPAC margin trajectory data
01
Chapter One
Medicaid promises to fund nursing home care for 1.4 million Americans.
It's the largest payer of long-term care in the country. 63% of all nursing home patient days. The safety net for every family that can't afford $355 a day in private-pay care.
And the provider tax is the best-kept secret in the industry.
08
Chapter Eight โ The Provider Tax Multiplier
You pay $10. You get back $17.
49 of 51 states use this mechanism. Federally protected through October 2026.
$10
You Pay
โ
+$7
Federal Match
โ
$17
Returns to You
โ
+$7
Net Gain/Day
$1.5B
California QAF
$600M+
Illinois Assessment
$400M+
Ohio Franchise Fee
Sources: MACPAC Health Care-Related Taxes (2020); MACPAC Non-Federal Financing (2024); AMA OBBB Summary
And the states that understand this? They're winning.
09
Chapter Nine โ The Proof
Fund quality and quality improves. The data is unambiguous.
+33%
Montana
Provider coalition + cost data + state budget alignment. Two fiscal years. Largest documented increase.
+25.5%
South Dakota
Rural access crisis narrative. "Your constituents won't have a nursing home." Direct legislative lobbying.
+$38/day
North Dakota
Cost-report-driven rebasing. Filed accurate 2023 costs. That's $1.39M/year per 100-bed facility.
$285M
New York
15 years of persistent lobbying. 591 facilities. Asked for 20%, got 7.5%, came back for more.
Formula
Colorado
HB23-1228: mandated minimum as % of provider fees. Structural, not one-time. 12% โ 15%.
+15%
Connecticut
$288 โ $306 โ $332 over three years. PDPM transition creates another rebasing opportunity.
Sources: Skilled Nursing News; AHCA Feb 2026 (quality-funding correlation); state legislative records; MN NF Rate Study 2025
So what should operators do?
10
Chapter Ten โ The Five Things
Five moves every operator should make. Now.
01
Know Your Total Package
Base + UPL + QIP + Tax Net = your real Medicaid revenue. Most operators undervalue themselves by $50โ$110/day.
02
Score Every State
Rate level + adequacy + growth + supplements + rebase frequency + stability. Below 70? Don't write the LOI.
03
Weaponize Cost Reports
In 19 cost-based states, your cost report IS your rate request. North Dakota: one cycle = $38/day.
04
Ride the PDPM Wave
VA, RI, CT, KS all switching methodology. Every transition = rebasing opportunity. Be at the table NOW.
05
Build the Coalition
Your competitor isn't the building across town. It's a legislature that thinks $148/day is enough. Fight together.
๐ฏ The Operator's Medicaid Playbook
Five strategic moves every multi-state SNF operator should be executing right now. Each one is a competitive advantage most of your peers are missing.
01
Stop Looking at Base Rates. Start Looking at Total Package.
Most operators undervalue states by $50โ$110/day because they only see the headline number.
Texas looks like the worst Medicaid state in America at $148/day. But add QIPP directed payments ($80โ110/day), provider tax recycling, and UPL supplements โ the effective rate is $230โ$260. That changes your entire acquisition thesis. The operators who know this are buying buildings their competitors won't touch.
1
Map Base Rate
State's published Medicaid per diem
2
Add Provider Tax Net
Pay $10, get back $16โ17. Net +$6โ7/day
3
Add UPL/IGT
Supplemental payments: $10โ80/day in some states
4
Add QIP/Directed Pay
TX QIPP alone adds $80โ110/day above base
5
Total Package PPD
THIS is your actual Medicaid revenue
๐ก
Eye-Opener
Texas: $148 base โ $260 total package. That's a 76% difference most operators never see. Run the total package calculation for every state you operate in โ you may be undervaluing your own Medicaid revenue.
๐ Panel Drop: "When someone tells you Texas pays $148 a day, ask them if they've heard of QIPP. The effective rate is $260. The operators who know the total package are the ones still buying buildings." โ Source: WPS GHA CY2025; MACPAC NF Payment Policy (QIPP structure)
02
Build a State Medicaid Scorecard Before You Write a Single LOI.
Rate adequacy should be your #1 diligence filter โ before census, before stars, before cap rate.
Too many operators evaluate acquisitions on cap rate and census, then discover the Medicaid environment after closing. The smartest multi-state operators score every state on 6 dimensions before they even look at a building. One bad state Medicaid philosophy can erase a 12-cap deal.
1
Rate Adequacy
Is Medicaid โฅ85% of cost? Below 80% = red flag
2
Rate Trajectory
3+ years of increases? Any recent cuts? Holiday dumps?
3
Methodology Fit
Cost-based = your costs matter. Case-mix = your documentation matters
4
Supplement Stack
UPL + QIP + Provider Tax = real revenue above base
Our Top 10 analysis scored North Dakota at 92/100, Oregon at 88, Minnesota at 85. Idaho scored in the low 50s. Same region, completely different risk profiles. If you're not scoring states before acquisitions, you're gambling.
๐ Panel Drop: "We won't write an LOI until we've scored the state. Rate level, rate growth, methodology, supplements, rebase frequency, regulatory stability โ six dimensions, one composite score. If it's below 70, we don't care what the cap rate is." โ Scoring methodology uses data from WPS GHA, MACPAC, MedPAC, state Medicaid agencies
03
Weaponize Your Cost Reports. They Are Your Best Advocacy Tool.
In 19 cost-based states, your cost report IS your rate request. Most operators leave money on the table.
North Dakota got a $38/day increase because operators filed accurate cost reports showing actual cost increases. Montana got 33% because the data was undeniable. In cost-based states, your cost report is the single most powerful document in your organization. Yet most operators treat it as a compliance exercise rather than a strategic weapon.
Staffing mandate costs, new compliance, infection control
3
Challenge Disallowances
Appeal every cost the state rejects. Build the paper trail
4
Coordinate Multi-Facility
Aggregate data across your portfolio for state-level impact
5
Feed to Legislature
Cost data โ access stories โ legislative testimony
๐
Eye-Opener
North Dakota: cost reports showed actual costs โ $38/day increase. That's $1.39M/year for a 100-bed facility. Montana: aggregated cost data โ 33% rate increase. The cost report is not paperwork. It's revenue strategy.
๐ Panel Drop: "Our CFO used to sign off on cost reports like they were tax returns โ minimize and move on. Now our cost reports are our most important strategic documents. In North Dakota, one accurate cost report cycle generated $38 more per day. That's $1.4 million a year per building." โ Source: Skilled Nursing News Dec 2023; MN NF Rate Study 2025
04
Join the PDPM Transition Wave โ Or Get Left Behind.
States switching from RUG to PDPM create a once-in-a-decade rebasing opportunity.
Virginia switched to PDPM in October 2025. Rhode Island switched the same month with a 5.3% rate increase. Connecticut is transitioning July 2026. Kansas is changing methodology entirely with "expected significant rate increases." Every methodology transition is a rebasing event โ the rare moment when old rate anchors get thrown out and new baselines get set. If you're in a transitioning state, this is your window.
1
Identify Transitions
VA, RI, CT, KS all switching 2025โ2026. More coming.
2
Master PDPM Coding
PDPM rewards clinical documentation. Train your MDS team NOW
3
Advocate During Transition
Rebasing discussions are open. Cost data matters most right now
4
Lock In New Baseline
The rate set during transition becomes the floor for years
๐
Eye-Opener
Rhode Island's PDPM transition came with 5.3% automatic increase. Kansas expects "significant" increases with its methodology change. Iowa still uses RUG-III โ the oldest case-mix system in America. States that modernize their methodology create opportunities. States that don't are leaving their operators stranded on 15-year-old rate architectures.
๐ Panel Drop: "We're watching three state methodology transitions right now. Every transition is a rebasing event โ the rare window where you can influence the baseline that locks in for years. If your state is switching to PDPM, you need to be at the table during the rate-setting discussion, not after." โ Source: CMS SPA records (VA, RI transitions); CT DSS; WPS GHA CY2025 (KS note)
05
Build a Rate Advocacy Coalition. Your Competitors Are Your Allies.
Every major state rate win came from operators who stopped competing long enough to collaborate.
Montana's 33% increase didn't happen because one operator asked nicely. It happened because the state's operators showed up together with unified cost data and a unified message. New York's $285M aggregate increase took 591 facilities speaking with one voice over 15 years. South Dakota's 25.5% came from rural operators telling legislators their communities would lose their only nursing home. Individual operators get meetings. Coalitions get rate increases.
1
Aggregate Data
Pool cost data across operators. State-level picture, not facility-level
2
Unified Message
One ask, one number, one narrative. Don't dilute with competing requests
3
Access + Quality Story
Cost data opens the door. Resident stories close the deal
4
Multi-Year Campaign
NY: 15 years. Don't stop after one session. Update data annually
5
Hold Them Accountable
Track rate vs. cost annually. Publish the gap. Make it public
๐ค
Eye-Opener
The states with the biggest rate wins all have one thing in common: organized provider coalitions. Montana (+33%), South Dakota (+25.5%), North Dakota (+$38/day), Colorado (formula floor), New York ($285M). The states with the worst rates โ Texas ($148 base), Kansas ($201), Missouri ($215) โ have fragmented advocacy. Correlation is not causation, but the pattern is undeniable.
๐ Panel Drop: "I tell every operator I meet: your competitor is not the building across town. Your competitor is a state legislature that thinks $148 a day is enough to care for someone's grandmother. Until every operator in your state agrees on that, you'll keep fighting each other for scraps instead of fighting together for a bigger pie." โ Source: Skilled Nursing News (MT, SD, ND successes); NY legislative records; CO HB23-1228
50-State Medicaid SNF Per Diem Rates
Click column headers to sort. Filter by region or methodology. All rates are CY2025 or most recent available.
Top 10 Healthiest Medicaid States for SNF Operators
Composite scoring across 6 dimensions: Rate Level (20pts), Rate Adequacy (25pts), Rate Growth (15pts), Supplemental Programs (15pts), Rebase Frequency (10pts), Regulatory Stability (15pts). Max score: 100.
Scoring Methodology
Rate Level (20pts): Higher absolute per diem = more points. Scaled relative to national distribution. Rate Adequacy (25pts): Medicaid rate as % of estimated cost of care. States covering 90%+ of costs score highest. Rate Growth (15pts): Documented rate increases over 2023-2026. Larger, more sustained increases score higher. Supplemental Programs (15pts): UPL, QIP, and provider tax recycling effectiveness. States with meaningful supplements score higher. Rebase Frequency (10pts): Annual rebasing = 10pts, biennial = 7pts, irregular or 5+ year cycles = 4pts. Regulatory Stability (15pts): No recent cuts, stable methodology, predictable rate-setting environment.
Composite scoring methodology developed by JockiBox Intelligence. Individual state data from WPS GHA, MN Rate Study, MACPAC, state Medicaid agencies.
Rate Adequacy Analysis
The National Shortfall
Average Medicaid per diem: $198 Average cost per diem: $253 Daily gap per Medicaid resident: $55 AHCA estimate of daily loss: $71โ$79 per Medicaid resident
Extrapolated national shortfall: ~$20 billion annually ($55/day ร ~1 million Medicaid residents ร 365 days)
Programs that add to the base Medicaid rate. The "total Medicaid package" is often significantly higher than the headline per diem.
Provider Tax / Bed Tax
49 of 51 jurisdictions have a nursing facility provider tax. Only Alaska and Wyoming do not.
Federal safe harbor: 6% of net patient revenue. Taxes within this threshold draw federal matching funds at the state's FMAP rate.
How it works: Facility pays a tax โ state pools revenue โ draws federal match โ returns funds as supplemental payments or rate add-ons. Net effect is a significant rate increase.
Federal protection: NF taxes are exempt from reduction if in effect by October 1, 2026 and within 6% threshold (OBBB Act).
Largest programs:
โข California QAF: ~$1.5 billion/year
โข Texas: embedded in QIPP funding
โข Illinois: $600M+ (Nursing Home Assessment)
โข Ohio: $400M+ (Franchise Permit Fee)
โข Massachusetts: $10.47โ$34.90/day by facility group
Sources: MACPAC Health Care-Related Taxes in Medicaid (2020); MACPAC Non-Federal Financing (2024); AMA OBBB Summary
UPL Supplemental Payments
45 of 51 jurisdictions use Upper Payment Limit (UPL) supplemental payments.
Mechanisms:
โข IGT (Intergovernmental Transfer): County/state-owned facilities transfer funds to draw federal match
โข CPE (Certified Public Expenditure): Public facilities certify their costs for direct federal match
Most impactful programs:
โข New York: $40โ80/day for qualifying facilities (largest UPL program nationally)
โข Illinois: $25โ40/day supplements
โข California: $20โ50/day
โข Texas: integrated into QIPP structure
โข Pennsylvania: significant UPL supplements
Sources: MACPAC NF FFS Payment Policy Compendium; CMS UPL regulations; State Medicaid Plan Amendments
Quality Incentive Programs (QIP)
23 of 51 jurisdictions have a formal QIP for nursing facilities.
Most impactful programs:
โข Texas QIPP: $20โ50+/day directed payment. Largest single-program impact nationally. Turns a $148 base rate into $220โ260 effective rate.
โข California QASP: $20โ30/day quality supplement above base rate
โข New York Quality Pool: $10โ30/day based on quality metrics
โข Georgia: QI embedded in July 2026 rates
โข New Jersey QIPP: Facility-specific increases of $50+/day above base
โข Idaho: Nursing Facility Quality Payment Program (separate from base rate)
Sources: MACPAC NF Payment Policy Compendium; state Medicaid agency QIP documentation; AHCA state-by-state data
Managed Care (MLTSS)
26 of 51 jurisdictions deliver NF Medicaid through some form of managed care.
Full MLTSS states include: AZ (since 1982), TN (since 1994), FL, TX, KS, VA, NY (partial), PA (partial), and others.
Key consideration: In managed care states, MCOs negotiate facility rates. State-directed payments (CMS-approved preprints) are critical to ensure funds reach providers.
Major MCOs in NF Medicaid: UnitedHealthcare, Centene/WellCare, Molina, Aetna/CVS, Humana, Anthem BCBS
Money Follows the Person: 49 of 51 jurisdictions participate (only AK and WY do not). 5 states have Tribal Initiative: MN, OK, ND, WA, WI.
Sources: MACPAC MLTSS (2022); CMS Managed Care Enrollment Report (2024); ADvancing States MLTSS Adoption (2021); CMS MFP program data
Strategic Levers to Increase Medicaid Rates
Seven categories of tactics with documented success stories and evidence.
1. Cost Report Optimization
States with cost-based methodologies respond when reported allowable costs rise. Focus on accurate reporting of all allowable costs โ labor inflation, benefits, agency staffing, census assumptions.
Most responsive: North Dakota, Montana, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois
Success: North Dakota's $38/day increase was driven directly by 2023 cost reports showing actual cost increases. (Source: Skilled Nursing News, Dec 2023)
2. Acuity Documentation (MDS)
In case-mix states, MDS coding quality directly determines per diem rates. Better documentation = higher case-mix index = higher payment.
Effective in: All states with case-mix or MDS-dependent methodology (WA, PA, VA, MA, RI, DC, HI + hybrid states)
Lever: States transitioning to PDPM (VA 10/2025, RI 10/2025, CT 7/2026) create rebasing opportunities. PDPM rewards clinical documentation. (Source: CMS PDPM transition guidance)
3. Legislative Advocacy
The most powerful lever. Direct engagement with state legislators using cost data, access stories, and coalition building.
Wins: Montana 33% increase (provider pressure + budget alignment). South Dakota 25.5% (rural access crisis). Colorado formula floor (HB23-1228). New York $285M aggregate. (Sources: Skilled Nursing News; state legislative records)
4. Quality Incentive Maximization
QIP programs fund above base rates. Maximize by targeting achievable metrics: staffing ratios, survey scores, hospitalization rates.
Best programs: TX QIPP ($20-50+/day), CA QASP ($20-30/day), NJ QIPP ($50+/day)
Key: QIP funding must be additive (not carved from base), scores must be objective and auditable, and incentive must exceed compliance cost. (Source: MACPAC NF Payment Policy)
5. Provider Tax Recycling
Provider taxes draw federal matching funds. A $10/day tax at 60% FMAP generates $25/day in total funding โ a net $15/day increase.
Optimization: Increase assessment within 6% safe harbor, change tax base, link revenue to directed payments or rate floors.
Federal protection: NF taxes are exempt from reduction through Oct 2026 (OBBB Act). This is the most secure supplemental funding mechanism. (Source: AMA OBBB Summary; MACPAC)
6. Managed Care Negotiation
In MLTSS states, MCO contract terms drive actual facility payments. State-directed payments are the critical mechanism.
Tactics: Push for state-directed payment preprints, negotiate separate NF rate terms, use network adequacy arguments for rate floors.
AHCA and LeadingAge both advocate for increased FMAP and rate adequacy. No federal rate floor exists โ establishing one would be transformative.
Risk: OBBB Act (H.R. 1) could force coverage loss and payment reductions. Enhanced FMAP expires Jan 2026.
Position: "Fund the mandate." CMS cannot simultaneously require higher staffing while paying 82ยข on the dollar. (Source: AHCA 2026 advocacy platform; LeadingAge 2026 Policy Platform)
Panel Q&A Preparation
25 operator-focused questions with data-backed answers. Organized by what a moderator will actually ask multi-state operators. Click to expand.
Sources & Bibliography
All data in this study is sourced from the following publications. Click any URL to verify.
Data Methodology Notes
โข State rates primarily from WPS GHA CY2025 Medicaid Swing-Bed NF Rates Compilation (statewide weighted averages for 36 states) and Minnesota Nursing Facility Rate Study 2025 by Myers & Stauffer (detailed rates/ranges for 8 Midwest states). Remaining states from state Medicaid agency sources.
โข Rate adequacy figures from ASPE/HHS, MedPAC, and AHCA publications.
โข Supplemental programs from MACPAC publications and state Medicaid plan amendments.
โข Confidence levels: High (41 states, direct WPS/MN data), Medium-High (3 states), Medium (6 states), Low (1 state โ Louisiana rate pending/estimated).
โข Composite Top 10 scoring is an analytical framework developed by JockiBox Intelligence using publicly available data.
Legislative Policy Proposal
The Idaho Nursing Facility Sustainability & Quality Act
A comprehensive reform proposal for Idaho's Medicaid skilled nursing facility reimbursement program. Designed to be handed directly to legislators and the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare.
Prepared by Idaho Health Care Association (IHCA) โ Robert Vande Merwe, Executive Director | August 2026 Target: 2027 Idaho Legislative Session
Executive Summary
Idaho's average Medicaid SNF per diem of $258.78 covers only 63โ70% of actual cost of care โ a structural deficit of $111โ$151 per resident per day. The state compounded this with rate cuts in September 2025 and July 2026, both timed to holiday weekends. Meanwhile, every neighboring state pays significantly more:
$259
Idaho
$586
N. Dakota (+126%)
$513
Oregon (+98%)
$389
Washington (+50%)
$292
Montana (+13%)
This proposal recommends six reforms. Net cost to Idaho's general fund: as low as $5.3 million/year โ less than $3 per Idaho resident โ because Idaho's 70.01% FMAP generates $2.33 in federal funds for every $1 the state invests.
Sources: WPS GHA CY2025 ($258.78 Idaho rate); KFF FMAP data (70.01%); MN NF Rate Study 2025 (comparison rates)
What's Broken: Idaho's Current System
Archaic Rate Methodology
Property rental rate formula (Idaho Code ยง56-108) uses a base of $9.24 per patient day โ set in 1985 and never updated. An age-degradation factor reduces this by 2.5% per year: a 30-year-old facility gets just $2.31/day for property costs.
Case-mix system: Still uses RUG-III โ which CMS abandoned for Medicare in 2019, seven years ago. No PDPM, no RUG-IV.
No mandatory rebasing. Rates drift from actual costs indefinitely.
Idaho's SNF Assessment Act (Title 56, Ch. 15) authorizes a provider assessment up to the 6% federal safe harbor. Idaho currently collects only ~3โ4% โ leaving approximately $45+ million in federal matching funds on the table every year.
Idaho's FMAP: 70.01% โ higher than Oregon (61.77%), Washington (50%), North Dakota (54.23%), and Montana (65.99%). Idaho gets MORE federal match per dollar than all its neighbors.
September 2025: Rate cut announced over Labor Day weekend โ legislature not in session.
July 2026: Additional cut effective over July 4th weekend โ again during recess.
Combined impact: ~$15โ20 million annual reduction from pre-cut baseline. No access impact study was conducted. No public comment period. No legislative review.
This pattern may violate 42 USC ยง1396a(a)(30)(A) โ the federal equal access provision requiring rates "sufficient to enlist enough providers."
42 CFR 447.203 (access monitoring); Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, 575 U.S. 320 (2015); CMS State Medicaid Director Letter #14-001
Workforce Crisis
CNA vacancy rates: 15โ25% statewide CNA starting wages in NFs: $14โ17/hour Walmart/Amazon in Idaho: $15โ19/hour Annual CNA turnover: 50โ80%
You cannot staff a nursing home when the facility across the street pays more to stock shelves. This is a reimbursement problem, not a labor market problem.
Idaho Department of Labor wage data; BLS Occupational Employment Statistics
The Budget Adjustment Factor (BAF): The Hidden Mechanism That Breaks the System
This is the single most important structural flaw in Idaho's Medicaid NF reimbursement. Understanding the BAF is understanding why the entire system needs to be replaced.
๐จ What the BAF Is
Idaho claims to have a "cost-based" reimbursement system โ meaning rates should reflect what it actually costs to care for residents. Here's what actually happens:
STEP 1: Cost Reports โ
Facilities submit annual cost reports showing actual costs. Direct care (nursing, food, supplies per ยง56-101(6)), indirect care (admin, housekeeping per ยง56-101(13)), and property costs (ยง56-108).
STEP 2: Rate Calculation โ
The Department calculates what rates SHOULD be based on reported costs. Costs are normalized for case-mix (ยง56-101(20)), capped at the bed-weighted median (ยง56-101(3)), and adjusted for the nursing facility inflation rate (ยง56-101(21)).
STEP 3: The BAF Is Applied โ
The Budget Adjustment Factor multiplies every facility's calculated rate by a number less than 1.0 to force total spending to fit within the state's appropriated Medicaid NF budget. If the BAF is 0.85, every facility gets a 15% haircut โ regardless of documented costs.
RESULT: Rates Disconnected from Costs โ
The "cost-based" label becomes fiction. Costs go up, cost reports prove it, and the BAF eliminates the increase. Idaho Code ยง56-101(21) defines a "nursing facility inflation rate" โ but the BAF overrides it. The statute promises inflation adjustment. The BAF takes it away.
BAF applied administratively through IDAPA rules (not explicitly authorized in Idaho Code Title 56, Ch. 1). Idaho Code ยง56-101 definitions at legislature.idaho.gov
โ ๏ธ What the BAF Doesn't Account For
1. Real-Time Labor Market Costs
Cost reports show what facilities PAID โ not what they NEED to pay. When McDonald's offers $17/hr and your CNA wage is $14, the cost report captures $14. The BAF then cuts even that. The actual cost to hire and retain is invisible to the formula.
2. Agency Staffing Premium
When facilities can't recruit at current wages, they use agency staff at 2โ3x the cost. Agency costs ARE reported, but the bed-weighted median (ยง56-101(3)) treats high-cost facilities as outliers and caps them. Then the BAF cuts further.
3. New Federal Mandate Costs
CMS staffing mandate (102K new caregivers, $4.3โ$6.8B nationally). Infection control requirements. Electronic health records. These costs appear in cost reports AFTER they're incurred โ creating a 1โ3 year lag. The BAF then suppresses them anyway.
4. Capital Investment Reality
The property formula (ยง56-108) already uses a $9.24/day base from 1985 with age-degradation. A 30-year facility gets $2.31/day. Then the BAF cuts even that. No facility can fund capital improvements at these levels. Buildings deteriorate. Quality suffers.
5. Acuity Changes
Idaho's NF residents are getting sicker as HCBS diverts lower-acuity patients. Higher acuity = higher costs. The case-mix index (ยง56-101(4)) should capture this, but when the BAF overrides the calculated rate, the acuity adjustment is neutralized.
6. Inflation Between Report and Rate
Cost reports reflect costs from 12โ36 months ago. Idaho Code ยง56-101(21) defines a nursing facility inflation rate to bridge this gap. But the BAF can โ and does โ override the inflation adjustment. The statute promises inflation protection. The BAF breaks the promise.
โ The Win-Win: Replace the BAF with a Transparent Component System
Eliminating the BAF isn't just good for operators. It's good for Idaho's budget.
๐ฅ Win for the State
Every dollar the BAF suppresses costs Idaho $2.33 in lost federal funds (70.01% FMAP). The BAF isn't saving money โ it's leaving federal money on the table. Higher rates = more federal match flowing into Idaho's economy.
๐ฉโโ๏ธ Win for Operators
Rates that actually reflect documented costs. Predictable, transparent rate-setting. Ability to invest in workforce, pay competitive wages, and maintain facilities. No more arbitrary budget haircuts.
๐ด Win for Residents
Better staffing ratios (adequate funding โ competitive wages โ filled positions). Better quality of care. More stable facilities โ fewer closures, fewer relocations. AHCA Feb 2026 proved: funding correlates with quality.
๐ต Win for Taxpayers
More federal dollars flowing into Idaho's economy ($32โ$82M in new federal funds depending on scenario). Reduced acute care costs ($14โ$37M in avoided hospitalizations). Preserved $1.53B in NF infrastructure.
๐ฏ The Core Argument for Legislators:
"The BAF makes Idaho's cost-based system a cost-based system in name only. Facilities document their costs. The state calculates what rates should be. Then the BAF discards that calculation to fit a budget number. Meanwhile, every dollar the BAF suppresses costs Idaho $2.33 in federal funds we'll never see. We're not asking for more state money โ we're asking Idaho to stop leaving federal money on the table. Replace the BAF with a transparent component system, and Idaho gets better care, more federal revenue, and the best nursing facility program in the Mountain West."
Idaho Code ยง56-101(21) (nursing facility inflation rate definition); ยง56-101(3) (bed-weighted median cost limits); ยง56-108 (property rental rate formula); KFF FMAP data (Idaho 70.01%); AHCA Feb 2026 (quality-funding correlation study)
Six Reforms: Building the Best Medicaid NF Program in America
Each reform includes the specific Idaho Code sections to amend, the model state program to reference, and the contact office at the model state for verification.
Reform A
Rate Methodology Reform โ Component-Based PDPM System
Replace the outdated cost-based/RUG-III methodology with a four-component rate:
Direct Care (55โ60%): Nursing salaries, supplies, food. PDPM case-mix adjusted, geographic wage indexed. Target: $145โ165/day
Indirect Care (25โ30%): Admin, activities, plant operations. No case-mix adjustment. Target: $65โ80/day
Capital (10โ12%): Replace ยง56-108 formula. Fair rental value with $25/day minimum. Target: $30โ45/day
Quality Incentive (5โ8%): Performance-based add-on. Target: $15โ30/day for top performers
Total target rate: $290โ350/day (still 40% below Oregon and North Dakota)
Mandatory annual rebasing using cost reports no older than 24 months.
๐ Model State: North Dakota โ Price-based RUG-IV, $586/day avg, 94% cost coverage, 5.5% assessment. Contact: ND Dept of Health & Human Services, Medical Services Division โ hhs.nd.gov
๐ Idaho Code Changes: Amend ยง56-101 (new definitions for PDPM, component rate, GAWI). Repeal ยง56-108 (property formula). New ยง56-108A (component methodology). New ยง56-108B (mandatory rebasing). Amend IDAPA 16.03.09 and 16.03.10.
Reform B
Provider Assessment Enhancement โ 5.5% of Net Patient Revenue
Idaho's SNF Assessment Act (Ch. 15) already authorizes up to 6%. Current collection is ~3โ4%. Increase to 5.5% (0.5% buffer below safe harbor).
Total NF net patient revenue (est.)
$518 million
Current assessment (~3.9%)
$20 million
New assessment at 5.5%
$28.5 million
Federal match at 70.01% FMAP
$66.5 million
Total program value
$95.0 million
Net new federal funds
$19.8 million
Fund allocation: 60% rate floor support ($17.1M) | 25% quality incentives ($7.1M) | 15% workforce development ($4.3M)
๐ Model States: North Dakota & Indiana โ Both use 5.5% assessment. IN generates ~$150M/yr for ~500 facilities. Contact: Indiana FSSA, Division of Aging โ in.gov/fssa | ND HHS โ hhs.nd.gov
๐ Model State: Colorado HB23-1228 โ Requires quality improvement plans as condition of enhanced rates. Contact: CO Dept of Health Care Policy & Financing โ hcpf.colorado.gov | Bill text: leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1228
๐ Idaho Code Changes: Amend ยง56-1504(3)(c) (expand VBP definition, specify scorecard domains, set bonus ranges). Idaho DHW Bureau of Long Term Care (Chris.Barrott@dhw.idaho.gov) currently administers NFQPP.
Reform D
Rate Floor โ No Facility Below 90% of Cost
Definition: The Medicaid per diem shall not be less than 90% of documented cost of care (audited cost report, inflation-adjusted to rate date).
Absolute minimum: $240/day (93% of current avg), adjusted annually by CPI-Medical.
Rate cut protections:
90-day public comment period for any rate reduction
No rate cut during legislative recess (unless Governor declares fiscal emergency)
Access impact study required before any cut (per 42 USC ยง1396a(a)(30)(A))
Cuts exceeding 2% require JFAC review and approval
๐ Model State: Colorado HB23-1228 โ "Payment must not be less than 12% of total provider fee payments" (July 2024), rising to 15% (July 2026). Removed 3% annual GF cap. Signed May 30, 2023. Appropriated $30.5M state + $31.8M federal. Full text: leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1228
๐ Idaho Code Changes: New ยง56-108C (rate floor definition, protections). Amend Title 56, Ch. 22 (require JFAC approval for cuts >2%).
Reform E
Workforce Development Fund โ $14.3M for CNA Pipeline
15% of enhanced assessment ($4.3M state) + federal match = $14.3M total annual fund.
CNA Training Pipeline (40%, $5.7M): Fund state-approved CNA programs at community colleges. Cover tuition + certification. Target: 500โ800 new CNAs/year. Require 24-month Idaho NF commitment.
LPN-to-RN Bridge (20%, $2.9M): Tuition assistance + loan forgiveness for nurses advancing while working in NFs. Target: 200โ300 students/year.
Wage Floor Support (30%, $4.3M): Supplements for facilities maintaining CNA wages at โฅ110% of county living wage (MIT Living Wage Calculator). Estimated target: $16.50โ19.00/hour.
Retention Bonuses (10%, $1.4M): Direct-to-employee: $1,000 at 12 months, $1,500 at 24 months, $2,500 at 36 months.
๐ Model State: Montana โ Workforce pipeline development was a key argument in securing 33% rate increase. MT DPHHS โ medicaidprovider.mt.gov
๐ Idaho Code Changes: Amend ยง56-1504(3) (add workforce development as authorized assessment fund use). Advisory committee with NF operators, CNA reps, Idaho Dept of Labor, Board of Nursing.
Reform F
Rate-Setting Process Reform โ No More Holiday Weekend Cuts
Mandatory annual calendar:
Oct 1: DHW publishes preliminary methodology parameters
Nov 1: Cost reports due
Jan 15: DHW publishes draft rates for each facility
Feb 1 โ Mar 31: 60-day public comment + two public hearings (Boise + eastern Idaho)
Apr 15: Final rates published with comment responses
May 1: 30-day facility appeal window
Jun 1: Final rates confirmed
Jul 1: New rates effective
Establish Nursing Facility Rate Advisory Committee โ NF operators, direct care workers, resident advocates, IHCA, LeadingAge Idaho, DHW, rural NF representative. Quarterly meetings, published recommendations.
๐ Idaho Code Changes: New section in Title 56 establishing rate-setting calendar. Amend Ch. 22 (require JFAC annual NF rate adequacy report by Jan 31).
Financial Model: What It Actually Costs
Idaho's 70.01% FMAP = $2.33 federal for every $1 state. This is the most efficient healthcare investment Idaho can make.
Three Scenarios โ Net Cost to Idaho's General Fund
Metric
Moderate (+20%)
Robust (+33%)
Full Parity
Target avg rate
$310/day
$345/day
$390/day (WA level)
Total spending increase
$45.9M
$77.2M
$117.5M
State GF share of increase
$13.8M
$23.1M
$35.2M
Provider assessment offset
โ$8.5M
โ$8.5M
โ$8.5M
Net state GF cost
$5.3M
$14.6M
$26.7M
Per Idaho resident/year
$2.80
$7.70
$14.00
Federal funds generated
$32.1M
$54.1M
$82.3M
The Moderate scenario costs Idaho's general fund $5.3 million per year โ and generates $32.1 million in new federal funds.
ROI from Reform
Reduced hospitalizations: $14โ37M/year in avoided acute care costs (10โ15% reduction in NF hospitalizations)
Workforce stability: $2.8โ7.5M/year from reduced CNA turnover
Financial model based on: 70 facilities, 73 avg beds, 80% occupancy, 60% Medicaid census, 895,345 annual Medicaid days, 70.01% FMAP
Implementation Timeline
1
Phase 1: Legislative Action (JanโJun 2027)
Introduce Idaho NF Sustainability & Quality Act. Enact assessment enhancement + rate floor + process reforms. Emergency rate stabilization: restore pre-September 2025 rates. Appropriate $2M for actuarial contract + IT.
2
Phase 2: Methodology Development (Jul 2027โJun 2028)
Contract actuarial firm (Myers & Stauffer/Milliman) for PDPM calibration study. Establish Rate Advisory Committee. Workforce Fund operational โ first CNA cohort funded. Quarterly assessment collection begins.
3
Phase 3: PDPM Transition Year 1 (Jul 2028โJun 2029)
50/50 blend: half new PDPM methodology + half legacy cost-based (Indiana model). Quality Scorecard dry run โ scoring with education, no payment impact. Monitor distributional impacts.
4
Phase 4: Full Implementation (Jul 2029โJun 2030)
Full PDPM component rates. Rate enhancement above budget-neutral (20โ33% increase). Quality bonuses active ($15โ30/day). Workforce Fund at full operation. Rate floor enforced.
Three tiers: Basic $568/day, Complex ~$765, Ventilator ~$1,284. Price-based prospective. Biennial rebase. 6% provider assessment. Quality metrics in CCO contracts.
๐ Oregon DHS, Aging & People with Disabilities oregon.gov/odhs | 503-945-5811
$292
Montana โ 33% Legislative Increase
Increased from $211 to $277+ through direct legislative action. Cost-based retained with rate enhancement. 6% assessment at federal safe harbor. Even post-increase, covers only ~60% of cost ($481/day actual).
State Plan Amendment โ Required for methodology change. 90โ180 day CMS approval. CMS is supportive of reforms that increase rates and improve access.
Regional offices: Region I (208-769-1567), Region II (208-334-0940), Region III (208-455-7150), Region IV (208-334-0940), Region V (208-736-3024), Region VI (208-239-6260), Region VII (208-528-5750)
Idaho's 70+ nursing facilities employ 8,000+ workers and serve 4,500+ Medicaid residents daily. This is critical healthcare infrastructure that cannot be replaced once lost.
For $5.3 million in state general fund โ less than $3 per Idaho resident per year โ we can generate $32 million in federal funds, stabilize every nursing home in the state, and build the best Medicaid SNF program in the Mountain West.
Every dollar Idaho invests generates $2.33 from the federal government. No other investment in Idaho has that return.
Prepared by Idaho Health Care Association (IHCA) | August 2026 | All data cited with primary sources Contact: Robert Vande Merwe, Executive Director • Luke Malek, Policy Director • (208) 343-9735
๐ฅ Downloadable Documents
Print or save any section as a PDF. Each button opens your browser's print dialog โ save as PDF from there.
๐
Infographics โ Visual Story
10-chapter visual narrative: The 82ยข Dollar, US Heatmap, Comparison Towers, Closure Crisis, Hidden Money waterfall, Provider Tax flow, Rate Growth Winners. Perfect for sharing or printing as handouts.
10 visual chapters | Animated charts | All data cited
๐ฏ
Operator Playbook
5 strategic plays every multi-state SNF operator should execute: Total Package PPD, State Scorecard, Cost Report Weaponization, PDPM Transition Wave, and Coalition Building. Each with step-by-step flow and panel talking points.
5 plays | Flow charts | Cited panel talking points
๐๏ธ
Idaho Medicaid Reform Proposal
"The Idaho Nursing Facility Sustainability & Quality Act" โ BAF analysis, 6 reform pillars, financial model (3 scenarios), implementation timeline, model state contacts with phone numbers, every Idaho Code section that needs to change.
6 reforms | BAF analysis | Idaho Code citations | Model state contacts
๐
Panel Q&A Prep
25 operator-focused questions with data-backed answers. Growth Strategy, Your States, Rate Mechanics, Advocacy, Industry Outlook. Every answer includes source citations.
25 Q&A pairs | 5 categories | All cited
๐
50-State Rate Table
All 50 states + DC with Medicaid SNF per diem rates, ranges, methodology, rebase frequency, and source citations.
51 jurisdictions | WPS GHA CY2025 + MN Rate Study
โ๏ธ
Draft Legislative Bill
Formal Idaho bill text in proper legislative format โ 18 sections amending Title 56, Idaho Code. Component-based rate methodology, provider assessment to 5.5%, quality incentive program, workforce fund, rate floor, process reform. Ready for Legislative Services Office review.
18 sections | Full legal format | Statement of Purpose + Fiscal Note
โ๏ธ
Technical Administration Guide
Complete algorithm specification for DHW rate analysts: 14-step rate calculation, all formulas, component ceilings, case-mix adjustment, quality scorecard rubric (15 measures, 100 points), two fully worked examples (urban Boise facility + rural Salmon facility), rate determination output format, IT systems requirements.
14-step algorithm | 2 worked examples | Quality rubric | IT specs
๐
Legislator Brief โ Plain Language
2-3 page plain-English explanation for every legislator: why this bill exists, what it does (6 reforms), how it works (3-year phase-in), benefits to constituents, providers, and the state, key numbers, and common questions answered.
3 pages | Plain English | Print-ready handout
๐ก๏ธ
Opposition Response Guide
15 anticipated objections with data-backed rebuttals: "too expensive," "it's a tax," "providers pocket it," "free market," "too complex," "CMS won't approve," and 9 more. Threat assessment, talking points, quick-reference rebuttal card for hearings.
15 objections | Data rebuttals | Quick-reference card | INTERNAL
๐ญ
Committee Testimony Script
Complete prepared testimony for House Health & Welfare Committee: Robert Vande Merwe primary (18-22 min), Luke Malek policy witness, rural administrator, CNA, and family member supporting witnesses. Includes anticipated Q&A with prepared responses.
Board executive summary with formal Resolution 2026-01 for endorsement vote. Board member action items by role, campaign overview, next steps. Ready for board meeting.
Resolution text | Board action items | Officer + region director assignments
๐บ๏ธ
Master Execution Playbook
THE master guide: 9-phase visual flowchart, week-by-week timeline with checkboxes, individual to-do lists for every person (Owen, Steve, Tim, Breanna, Jordan, Robert, Luke, Lindsay, Dana, Riley, all board), federal & state compliance checklists, campaign budget, risk register, success metrics, contact directory.
All sections in one document: Overview, WOW Statements, Rates, Top 10, Adequacy, Programs, Levers, Infographics, Playbook, Q&A, Idaho Proposal, and Sources. Full research report with all citations.
All sections | 25+ sources | Print-optimized
Interactive Data Visualizations
50-State Medicaid SNF Rate Comparison
All 50 states + DC ranked by average Medicaid per diem. Source: WPS GHA CY2025; MN NF Rate Study 2025.
Payer Mix โ Patient Days
Source: MedPAC March 2026
Rate Methodology Distribution
Source: MACPAC NF Payment Policy
Regional Average Rates
Source: WPS GHA CY2025
All-Payer Margin Trajectory
Source: MedPAC March 2025/2026
Idaho vs. Neighboring States โ Rate & FMAP
Idaho has the highest FMAP (most federal leverage) but pays the lowest rate. The bars show Medicaid rate; the line shows federal match per $1 state investment.
Fund Quality. Get Quality. The data is unambiguous.
AHCA February 2026 Study
"Medicaid funding is directly correlated with nursing home quality." States that increased rates saw measurable quality improvement across staffing ratios, star ratings, and hospitalization rates.
MedPAC March 2026
All-payer total margin improved from -1.4% (2022) to 2.1% (2024) โ "driven primarily by aggregate increases in Medicaid base rates." States that raised rates stabilized facilities.
Montana: The Case Study
33% rate increase over 2 fiscal years. Workforce stabilization followed. CNA vacancy rates improved. Facility closure risk reduced. Access preserved in rural communities.
The Inverse Is Also True
774 facility closures since 2020. 62,567 beds lost. 28,421 residents displaced. States that cut rates or froze them saw accelerated closures and quality decline. Defunding doesn't save money โ it shifts costs.
Sources: AHCA Feb 2026 press release; MedPAC March 2026 Ch.7; AHCA 2024 Access Report; Skilled Nursing News (MT)
๐ฐ The FMAP Cheat Sheet: What $1 Buys in Each State
FMAP = Federal Medical Assistance Percentage. Higher FMAP = more federal money per state dollar. Idaho's 70.01% is among the highest.
IDAHO
$2.33
federal per $1 state FMAP: 70.01%
UTAH
$2.35
FMAP: 70.35%
MONTANA
$1.94
FMAP: 65.99%
OREGON
$1.62
FMAP: 61.77%
N. DAKOTA
$1.18
FMAP: 54.23%
WASHINGTON
$1.00
FMAP: 50.00%
Idaho gets $2.33 for every $1 invested. North Dakota gets $1.18. Yet North Dakota pays $586/day and Idaho pays $259.