Second, this analysis does not address the underlying quality of case reporting data. This analysis was conducted using the patchwork of reported and estimated HIV cases made available to the Committee. Results should therefore be interpreted with caution. Moreover, the Committee could not directly investigate whether the inclusion of existing HIV case-reporting data provides a superior measure of true known HIV/AIDS prevalence than the sole use of AIDS data. Despite these limitations, both the descriptive analysis and the multiple regression analysis highlight important features of RWCA funding allocation.

Third, this analysis does not address regional medical practice patterns or regional disparities in the costs of AIDS care. As discussed elsewhere in this report, differences in the costs of important inputs might justify additional expenditures in high-cost cities and states.

Fourth, this analysis does not address differences in program quality and outcomes across jurisdictions. Such differences might also justify additional expenditures in jurisdictions that contain the most effective or cost-effective programs and interventions.

REFERENCES

GAO (General Accounting Office). 2000. Ryan White CARE Act: Opportunities to Enhance Funding Equity. GAO/T-HEHS-00-150 Washington, DC: GAO.


HRSA. 2002a. FY2002 Ryan White CARE Act Title I Emergency Relief Grants. (Email communication from Steven Young, HRSA, July 22, 2002).

HRSA. 2002b. FY2002 Ryan White CARE Act Title II Emergency Relief Grants. (Email communication from Steven Young, HRSA, July 22, 2002).



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement