M3 MCH Block Grant - Assignment Example

The state also expended $3784686 on children with special healthcare needs and $15580242 on administration costs (Department of Public Health: State of Oklahoma, 2012). Administration costs include CDC, education, family planning, ECCS and SSDI covered under the Title V program. The state spends relatively high costs on administration although such costs covered important activities and functions important in ensuring health improvement among the target population. Most of the expenditures in this state do not exceed the budgetary allocations with majority of expenses falling below the allocated amounts.

Budgetary allocations adhere to the 30%/ 30% /10% recommended usage of the funds allocated by the federal government. The State of California expenditures on Pregnant Women Health Care Services amounted to $25490798, $ 40756466 on infants less than 1 year old, $122301136 on children aged between 1 year and 22 years, and $2545164487 on children with special healthcare needs. The state also spent $3041535 on administrative costs (Department of Public Health: State of California, 2012). Under administrative costs, the state allocates $93713 for SSDI, $132000 and CDC $175000.

The state highest expenses involve the provision of healthcare to children between the age of 1year and 22 years. This can be attributed to the large number of people covered within this age bracket. California spends more on infants and children less than one year compared to expenses on pregnant women. Such differences could be explained by the wide range of healthcare services required by infants between the age of 0 and 1 year. Nevertheless, the state takes into account the 30% allocation of allocated funds to state to primary and preventive care, 30% to provision of healthcare to children with special needs.

The state’s allocations for administrative costs remain below the 10% requirement of all grant funds allocated to the state (Department of Public Health: State of Oklahoma, 2012). The state of Oklahoma and the state of California adhere to the 30%/30%/10% funds allocation criteria legislated by the federal government. One of the differences between the two states revolves around the total amount of expenditure in which California records higher total expenditures compared to the state of Oklahoma.

In addition, the state of California received a higher grant allocation from the federal government compared to the state of Oklahoma. This could be attributed to the population differences between the two states. Based on the federal government’s requirements, the two states have similar expenditure groups as a way of ensuring that all healthcare needs mandated under the federal grant usage legislations. However, it is clear that the state of California does not allocate funds to family planning activities which fall under the administrative costs (Department of Public Health: State of California, 2012).

Conversely, the state of Oklahoma uses significant amounts from the grant allocations to administrative costs to finance family planning activities. The state of California allocates separate funds for CDC and SSDI unlike in Oklahoma where such funds fall under administrative costs. Expenditures for two all categories differ depending on the difference on the total amount of grant allocated by the federal government to the state. Ways in which Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Block Grants May Be Spent On Dental Services Maternal and Chil