Los Angeles Urban Indian Roundtable
Published by the UCLA American Indian Studies Center
Access to Care Among American Indians and Alaska Natives in Los Angeles
Policy Brief Number Four, February 2016
Introduction
Los Angeles continues to be one of the largest and most diverse metropolitan areas in the country. Correspondingly, Los Angeles is also home to the nation's largest population of American Indians and Alaska Natives (roughly 222,000 according to a US Census Bureau report released in June 2015).1 A little known fact is that nearly 70% of the nation's 5.2 million American Indians and Alaska Natives (AIAN) live in urban areas.2 Sometimes referred to as "Invisible Tribes," these urban-dwelling AIANs face unique and complex challenges when trying to access health care. This policy brief describes the current landscape of health care coverage for AIANs residing in Los Angeles. It highlights some of the misperceptions about access in this special population; identifies their current barriers to care; and formulates recommendations to optimize the health and well-being of this vulnerable yet resilient population.
Assumption #1: All American Indians and Alaska Natives, including those residing in Los Angeles, are eligible for free health care through the Indian Health Service (IHS).
FALSE. In exchange for land and natural resources, the US government is legally obligated to provide health care for American Indians and Alaska Natives. This obligation is codified in legislation, treaties, and intergovernmental policies over centuries, and is also part of the Federal Trust Responsibility.3 However, IHS is not a health insurance program, and does not provide minimum essential health benefits.
Numerous federal policies have interfered with this health care obligation. First, Termination Era policies resulted in countless tribes being stripped of their sovereignty, land base, and federal recognition, making the perception of eligibility for IHS services of non-federally recognized tribes complicated. In reality, there is no tribal or ethnic requirements to use urban Indian clinics, but this may vary for tribal clinics. For instance, of those AIANs in California who identify as being from a California tribe, only 45% reported having access to IHS services.4 This may be due to the fact that many California tribes continue legal battles to gain or regain recognition by the federal government.5 Tribes indigenous to Los Angeles County do not have a land base, or federal recognition, and there is no specific data on their access to care.
Second, the Relocation Era resulted in a large demographic shift of AIANs from their tribal lands to urban areas. If one does not live on or near the reservation of the tribe in which the individual is enrolled, it may be difficult to access certain services out of that service delivery area. This is true of of AIANs residing in California who are not from a California tribe; only 9% reported having access to IHS. AIANs from non-California tribes represent 50.9% of all AIANs in California.6
Third, the IHS budget is only funded at 56% of need, with the lowest per capita spending compared to all other Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) agencies.7 Despite the fact that more than 70% of AIANs reside in urban areas, only 1% of the total IHS budget is allocated for Urban Indian Health Organizations.8 Even if urban AIANs do have access to IHS, often the services are limited to primary care. Hence, urban AIANs cannot solely rely on the IHS as a usual source of care, or for specialty care. This point is particularly salient in Los Angeles, where there is currently only one Urban Indian Health Organization for the entire county.
Assumption #2: Since a large proportion of AIANs live at or below the federal poverty level (FPL), the level of uninsured should be low due to coverage by public insurance programs such as Medi-Cal, Medicare, or the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).
FALSE. Nearly one-fifth of AIANs in Los Angeles are uninsured, despite their overrepresentation in public insurance programs compared to non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) (table 1). Overrepresentation in public insurance programs is in part explained by high unemployment and poverty rates.9 AIANs who are between the ages of 18–64, male, greater than 125% of the FPL, and with a disability are more likely to be uninsured (appendix, table 2).* Even after controlling for these factors simultaneously in a statistical model, AIANs are still more likely to be uninsured and without private insurance compared to NHWs (fig. 1).* One potential reason for this is historical mistrust. AIANs, as well as other communities of color, have reasons to distrust government programs, researchers, and clinicians due to past experiences including involuntary sterilization, mishandling of research specimens, and withholding of information.10,11 Cultural barriers such as language differences between provider and patient, fear, intimidation, and preference of traditional beliefs may also contribute to disinterest in seeking out Western medicine.12,13
Assumption #3: With the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), and the reauthorization of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA), AIANs are receiving better access to health care.
Unfortunately, there is limited data on AIAN access to care after the passage of the ACA. Between October 2013 and April 2014, roughly 4,000 AIANs in California enrolled in a subsidized insurance plan (excluding Medi-Cal).14 Under the ACA, every American is guaranteed subsidies for health insurance if they fall within certain income levels.
In addition, federally recognized AIANs are eligible for special provisions:15
While these special provisions take into consideration the federal Indian trust responsibility, there are unintended consequences associated with them. For example, these provisions are limited to those AIANs enrolled in federally recognized tribes (or who otherwise qualify for IHS). Exemption from the penalty of the individual mandate may have the unintended consequence of disincentivizing AIAN individuals from enrolling in an insurance plan at all. Further, enrollment in IHS alone does not meet the minimum essential coverage requirement.16
Recommendations to Improve Access to Health Care for American Indians and Alaska Natives Who Reside in Los Angeles County:
Data
Best Practices in a Culturally Sensitive Medical Home
Determinants of Health Equity
Similar dedication to a vulnerable community is not unprecedented, as illustrated by the joint efforts of former Governor Pat Brown, District Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, Los Angeles County, and the University of California. Together they recognized the needs of the South LA community and committed to the cosponsoring of an Assembly bill, funding, opening, and reopening the Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital.20 On the heels of other meaningful efforts such as the Native Lives Matter and the School-to-Prison Pipeline/Restorative Justice movements, the time is ripe for considering innovations for improving Los Angeles AIAN health, wellness, and access to health care.
"Indian people still lag behind the American people as a whole in achieving and maintaining good health. I am signing this bill because of my own conviction that our first Americans should not be last in opportunity."
—Gerald R. Ford on signing the Indian Health Care Improvement Act in 1976
Acknowledgments
This brief was commissioned by the Los Angeles City/County Native American Indian Commission and the American Indian Community Council, and was co-developed with the Los Angeles Urban Indian Roundtable.
The Los Angeles Urban Indian Roundtable members include:
American Indian Chamber of Commerce
American Indian Community Council
American Indian Healing Center
Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians
Los Angeles City/County Native American Indian Commission
Pukúu Cultural Community Services
Red Circle Project
Southern California Indian Center
Title VII at Los Angeles Unified School District
Torres Martinez Tribal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
UCLA American Indian Studies Center
United American Indian Involvement
We would like to thank our sponsors, The California Wellness Foundation, and the County of Los Angeles Board Supervisor Don Knabe for their support of this project.
Suggested citation
Access to Care Among American Indians and Alaska Natives in Los Angeles. American Indian Studies Center at UCLA. February, 2016.
Contributions
Data analysis was completed by Jonathan Ong and Paul Ong of UCLA. Thank you to Dr. Andrea Garcia (Mandan/Hidatsa/Arikara) for her contributions to this brief.
Jonathan Ong graduated from UCLA with a major in Japanese and minor in film studies, and has worked as a data analyst on projects related to socioeconomic inequality.
Professor Paul Ong holds joint appointments in Asian American Studies, Luskin School of Public Affairs, and Institute of the Environmentand Sustainability.
References
Data source: United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS): Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) 3-year estimates, 2009–2011, https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/data/pums.html.