All States require documentation of HIV status for ADAP enrollment. At present, nine States also require individuals to demonstrate disease progression (e.g., a lab test showing a CD4 count of 500 or less). In addition, four ADAPs have specific criteria for accessing protease inhibitors and/or antiretrovirals.
Rapid growth in client enrollment, utilization, and expenditures has resulted in major challenges to States as they try to promote access to treatment while ensuring that ADAPs remain fiscally sound. State responses include: maximizing resources through different cost-savings strategies, establishing representative advisory bodies to help with difficult program decisions; including defining eligibility criteria, and seeking additional funds from State legislatures or other resources.
|Criteria as Percentage of Federal Poverty Level (FPL)||Number of States/Grantees|
|100% or below FPL||2 ADAPs*|
|101 to 200% FPL||12 ADAPs|
|201 to 300% FPL||21 ADAPs|
|Over 300% FPL||19 ADAPs|
|* Utah uses a sliding fee scale for incomes from 201-500% FPL.
2003 Federal Poverty Level is $9310/year per individual, $12,490 for a family of two.
|Grantee||HIV+ Diagnosis||CD4 Count <500||Specific Criteria for PIs||Financial Eligibility (% of FPL)|
|American Samoa (2)||N/A|
|F. Sts. Micronesia (2)||N/A|
|Marshall Islands (2)||N/A|
|Northern Mariana (2)||N/A|
|Republic of Palau (2)||N/A|
|South Carolina (4)||yes||300|
|South Dakota (1)||yes||yes||300|
Based on projections from States in their Ryan White CARE Act FY 2004 Title II grant applications ADAP Profile: (1) South Dakota does not include protease inhibitors on their formulary (2) Developing ADAP (3) Utah uses a sliding fee scale for incomes from 201-500% FPL (4) South Carolina uses a sliding fee scale for incomes from 301% to 550% FPL (5) Oregon uses a sliding scale that is tied to the annual income cap amount.