Closing of Empire DM leaves uncertain transportation planning
ELMIRA HEIGHTS, N.Y. (WETM) — The closing of the Empire DM Medical Transportation in Elmira Heights has made it one less option for people who rely on the service.
The transportation company told 18 News on Wednesday, May 14, that it was closing due to financial reasons. People who are Medicaid eligible might have to wait a little longer to arrive at their appointments. The director of the Chemung County Department of Aging and Long Term Care, Beth Stranges, anticipates that people will be concerned about delays in medical transportation services, in particular people with mobility impairment who require special accommodations.
Empire DM to cease transportation services in the Southern Tier
'I can see that this is going to have a big impact on Medicaid eligible individuals, people that receive Medicaid funding to provide their transportation to their medical appointments. Many of our older adults are now eligible for Medicaid. They've raised the income guidelines, therefore, many more people that are aging are eligible,' Stranges said. 'They may utilize wheelchairs or have mobility devices that require the transportation that was provided by Empire DM to get them to their medical appointments.'
Stranges suggested people to call Medical Answering Service at 866-932-7740 to schedule Medicaid rides to transport them to their appointments. She also included local transportation services such as buses and a transportation company called Total Transportation in Elmira.
Total Transportation Vice President, Peter Kadar, told 18 News that the company provides rides to people for their medical appointments. Kadar expects to see an increase in people scheduling rides and recommends people to plan 24 hours in advance. The company is limited on wheelchair vans at this time but is in the process of purchasing two to three new vans with wheelchair lifts and have them by late May or June.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Don't cut off Medicaid for people in jail awaiting trial
Every day across this country, thousands of people presumed innocent are locked up awaiting trial. For many of them — particularly those battling substance use disorders or mental illness — that jail cell is more than just a loss of freedom. It often comes with the loss of health care coverage. In many states, Medicaid and other health care benefits are suspended or terminated the moment the patient is booked into jail. This policy puts lives at risk and creates gaps in care. And for those of us who have lived through addiction or worked alongside people in recovery, we know just how dangerous that gap can be. Our prison and jail systems need the Due Process Continuity of Care Act, because it will help maintain Medicaid coverage during pretrial incarceration. It's up to Congress to follow through and pass this important piece of legislation, to shift from a model that prioritizes severe punishment to one that prioritizes care and continuity. People are struggling and deserve a chance to get better, not get worse, simply because they were arrested. The link between incarceration and behavioral health is no coincidence. So many people end up in jail not because they're dangerous, but because they're living with untreated mental health challenges or deep in addiction and haven't gotten the help they need. And the damage doesn't stop at the jail door. When people are released, often without any plan to restart their medical benefits or reconnect to care, they walk right back into the same instability, only now with deeper trauma and fewer resources. It's no surprise that the risk of overdose skyrockets after release. Studies show people are up to 129 times more likely to die of a drug overdose in the first two weeks after leaving jail or prison. I've seen firsthand the deadly consequences when someone is locked up pretrial and loses access to their medications, therapy or support systems. People are in withdrawal. They suffer in silence and spiral without the care they relied on outside those walls. Our jails, already under-resourced and overwhelmed, have become the frontlines of a behavioral health crisis they were never built to manage. They're acting as detox centers and psychiatric hospitals by default, and that's not just unsustainable, it's inhumane. Keeping health care coverage active during pretrial incarceration isn't just the right thing to do morally, it's smart policy. It prevents needless suffering, reduces recidivism, and eases the burden on emergency services and hospitals. It helps people transition from jail back into their communities with the support they need to stay healthy and free. And ultimately, it saves money by keeping people out of crisis and out of the revolving door of the criminal legal system. Let's be clear: taking health care away from someone who hasn't yet been convicted of a crime is not justice. It's a systemic failure. If we truly believe in second chances, if we believe in treating addiction and mental illness as health issues, not criminal ones, then we have to make sure that care doesn't stop at the jailhouse door. Health care is a lifeline. Let's stop cutting that lifeline when people need it most. John Bowman is Kentucky senior campaign organizer.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Local leaders respond to potential Medicaid cuts
DERBY, Conn. (WTNH) — Leaders of multiple local hospitals came together Monday morning to warn what might happen if Republicans in Congress pass their proposed changes to Medicaid. They worry state and local costs will skyrocket if the federal government makes proposed changes to how the program works. One of the proposed changes involves charging low-income patients a co-pay of as much as $35 for certain medical appointments. Hartford HealthCare introduces 'Empowering New Parents' program 'What this does is act as a barrier,' said Griffin Hospital CEO Patrick Charmel. 'People will see they have an out-of-pocket responsibility and just won't pursue the care that they need.' Eventually, he said, those people will end up in the emergency room, which ends up costing more. The Trump administration contends their changes will lower insurance premiums, but Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT3) disagrees. 'Premiums for individual plans sold on Access Health CT will increase by as much as 25% next year,' DeLauro said. DeLauro says proposed cuts threaten access to health care for nearly 14 million people nationwide. A white house spokesman had a different take in an emailed statement. 'President Trump pledged to protect and preserve Medicaid, and that's exactly what The One, Big, Beautiful accomplishes by kicking illegal immigrants off the program, implementing commonsense work requirements, and enforcing basic eligibility verification to combat fraud,' wrote spokesman Kush Desai. Hartford HealthCare and Pfizer partner to tackle workplace migraines For those not on Medicaid, they may wonder why they should care about these cuts. Hospitals have to provide care to everybody who needs it, whether they can pay for it or not. If there is less money from the government coming in to pay for low-income patients, that means hospitals that are already stretched thin financially, could find themselves in serious financial trouble. 'Cuts to programs that support our communities like Medicaid will stress that ecosystem further and bring changes, challenges and collapses to some of our critical infrastructure across the state of Connecticut,' said Dr. Tom Balcezak, EVP & Chief Clinical Officer, Yale New Haven Health System. Which, they say, means fewer people seeing fewer doctors. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Tariffs are raising health care costs and putting patients at risk
Lately, my bi-weekly calls with my 24-year-old daughter, a medical assistant preparing for med school, are starting to sound more like supply chain audits. She tells me which items are running low at her clinic and how the team is scrambling to provide quality care to patients. Having been raised by a parent who managed global supply chains, she knows these aren't just inventory issues — they are cracks in a fragile health care system now under further strain from President Trump's tariffs and the uncertainty surrounding them. Last year alone, the U.S. imported more than $75 billion in medical devices and supplies. While headlines have focused on potentially higher costs for pharmaceuticals and high-tech medical equipment, the more urgent and often overlooked concern is the availability of basic, everyday lifesaving supplies. Gloves, syringes, sterile water, IV fluids and even diapers may seem mundane, but they are the lifeblood of clinical care. Hospitals spend approximately 25 percent of their budget on these high-volume items. Most of these essentials are imported. For example, two-thirds of non-disposable face masks and 94 percent of plastic gloves used in U.S. health care settings come from China. Already impacted by tariffs implemented last year to counter low-cost imports, these products are now becoming even more expensive. Enteral syringes used to deliver medication or nutrition through feeding tubes are now subject to a staggering 245 percent tariff, according to one group purchasing organization. If trade tensions continue to escalate, we could see a return to pandemic-era supply shortages — or worse. As hospitals prepare for these impacts, it's their patients who will bear the repercussions. The American Hospital Association recently reported that 82 percent of health care leaders expect tariff-related price hikes to increase hospital costs by at least 15 percent within six months. One major health system in Washington projected that tariffs could increase annual costs by $10 to $25 million. With Medicaid reimbursement rates set by the government and private insurance reimbursement rates held in place by contracts, hospitals can't easily pass on these increases. Instead, they absorb the costs and find other cuts, like reducing staffing or delaying upgrades. That could mean longer wait times, postponed procedures and ultimately, worse outcomes for patients. Rural hospitals and community providers already operating on razor-thin margins will feel these burdens most acutely. Close to 200 rural hospitals have closed in the past two decades, and nearly 700, or close to one-third of all additional rural hospitals, are at risk of closing in the near future. When policymakers impose sweeping trade measures without fully considering downstream effects, the entire health care system suffers the consequences. The disruption often costs more than the policy itself, in both dollars and diminished patient care. Health care policy is essential for a productive economy, which is the main goal of the president's tariffs. Medical supplies should be exempted from tariffs. This would help to ensure more consistent pricing and ensure Americans have access to the health care essentials they need. Policymakers can also help bring manufacturing for some of these products back home by investing in more public-private partnerships and supporting infrastructure and workforce development to encourage companies to make these goods in the U.S. Finally, the federal and state governments can reengineer the procurement processes for Medicare and Medicaid, and enact measures to ensure more efficient practices in the private sector to enable competition and fair prices. Pharmacy benefit managers and Group Purchasing Organizations need to work on behalf of the patients, hospitals and clinics to better manage costs, similar to processes in other supply chain systems. Overall, policymakers must understand that while tariffs may shift economic leverage, they also shift risk onto patients. My daughter is learning this lesson on the front lines. She went into medicine to deliver care. Lately, and too often, she's just delivering bad news. Jack Buffington is Supply Chain Management Professor at the University of Denver.
