The findings reveal that IoT applications and connected experiences could be a smart investment for many retailers, especially those in the hyper-competitive fashion sector.

So how do the figures add up for omnichannel retail?

The report was published by InternetRetailing EXPO.

2. What are the benefits to our customers? What are the associated costs and risks?

I've written before here on Forbes.com about remembering that our fundamental responsibility as marketers is to create value for customers. This is the pathway to sustainable, long-term business growth, in my opinion. So it makes sense to see any new tech project through the customer value lens. For example, does introducing an AR app for trying different hairstyles and colors, as the world's largest beauty company, L'Oréal, recently did, deliver more value to their customers? If it changes the core customer experience for the better, then great. If it adds a new touchpoint or set of touchpoints that customers will deem relevant and appreciate, fantastic. But if it is just tech for the sake of it without any direct connection to improving things from the customer perspective, then think twice about it.

3. Would testing or experimenting with this new tech teach us anything that could be useful later on? Is this worth investing in now (vs. waiting)?

Imagine what you're going to get before you jump in. For example, what new data streams will be created and how might they better inform people inside your organization about meaningful things? Will this teach your people new things, or give them the motivation and opportunity to learn new things that are going to be useful? Think through these aspects, as it is often the case that a new tech project is going to be valuable internally from largely a learning standpoint. And then it is also worth deciding if now is the right time. Maybe waiting a bit (e.g., while new tech platforms' bugs are ironed out) isn't necessarily a bad thing. And perhaps you can learn vicariously by watching other companies jump in first–as long as it doesn't give them a major new competitive advantage over you, of course.

4. Do we have the internal capability or sufficient external partner/supplier networks do pull this off?

Seems straightforward to ask, but it is worth thinking about at this stage instead of deciding to go ahead and then figuring out how to implement. Ideally, there will be some internal capability in place, but invariably external partners will be needed for particularly new things. The external route can be smart, as they have transferable expertise and learnings, and they in some sense can take on some of the risk.

5. How do we determine success or failure?

Also straightforward but often an afterthought when the SNTS is driving new tech project investments in marketing. Figure out what success (and, conversely, failure) looks like and set some KPIs–just like for any other strategic investment. Despite the uncertainty of something new, you can figure out some reasonable and meaningful KPIs. They probably won't be related to sales conversions, though. They should be connected to things like development of internal capabilities, learning outcomes, customer usage and engagement.

Medicaid and CHIP cover about half (48%, or about 6.8 million) of children with special health care needs in the U.S. as of 2016 (Figure 1).1 Box 1 below describes children with special health care needs.  Medicaid or CHIP is the sole source of coverage for 41 percent of these children.  Another seven percent have Medicaid/CHIP to supplement private insurance.  Medicaid provides a wide range of medical and long-term care services, many of which are not covered at all or only available in limited amounts through private insurance, and makes coverage affordable for many children with special health care needs and their families.

This issue brief compares the demographics, health status, access to care, and coverage affordability of Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs to those with private insurance and those who are uninsured.  Medicaid plays a key role for children with special health care needs by making coverage affordable and covering services that private coverage typically does not. Consequently, legislative proposals that would cap and reduce federal Medicaid funding may pose a particular risk to children with special health care needs and their providers.  While Congress did not pass such legislation in 2017, these proposals may resurface in 2018, and the Trump Administration’s FY 2019 proposed budget continues to advance these proposals.  A companion brief describes Medicaid’s role for children with special health care needs.

Children with special health care needs who have Medicaid/CHIP are significantly more likely to live in low income families, below 200% of the federal poverty level, compared to those with private insurance only.  Nearly eight in 10 (78%) Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs live in families with incomes below 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL, less than $41,560/year for a family of three in 2018), compared to 17% of those with private insurance only. Nearly six in 10 (57%) of  children with special health care needs who have both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance live in a family with income below 200% FPL.  Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs are about 10 times less likely, and those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance are about three times less likely, than those with private insurance only to live in a family with income of 400% FPL or higher ($83,120/year for a family of three in 2018, 5% vs. 16% vs. 49%) (Figure 2).

Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are significantly more likely to be a member of a racial or ethnic minority group compared to those with private insurance only, while over half (53%) of those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance are non-Hispanic white.  Nearly seven in 10 (68%) children with special health care needs with private insurance alone are non-Hispanic white compared to less than four in 10 (38%) Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs (Figure 3).

Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs are significantly more likely to have multiple chronic conditions and to be in fair or poor health compared to those with private insurance only. Close to four in 10 (37%) Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs have four or more chronic conditions, compared to less than a quarter (23%) of those with private insurance only.  Over half (51%) of those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance have four or more chronic conditions. Some of the chronic conditions reported by children with special health care needs include autism, intellectual disability, asthma, depression, anxiety, attention deficient hyperactivity disorder, cerebral palsy, cystic fibrosis, diabetes, muscular dystrophy, brain injury, heart conditions, and epilepsy.  Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are three times as likely (9%), and those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance are four times as likely (12%), to be in fair or poor health compared to those with private insurance alone (3%) (Figure 4).

As a result of their poorer health, Medicaid/CHIP children are significantly more likely to have multiple health care service needs during the course of a year and to have their daily activities affected by their health compared to those with private insurance only.  Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are significantly more likely (25%) to require three or more health care services, such as specialist care; prescription medication; speech, occupational, or behavioral therapy; or mental health treatment or counseling, compared to those with private insurance alone (17%).  Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are nearly twice as likely (43%) to have four or more functional difficulties compared to those with private insurance alone (24%).  Over half (55%) of those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance have four or more functional difficulties. Functional difficulties experienced by children with special health care needs include problems with bodily functions, such as breathing, swallowing, or chronic physical pain; activities or participation, such as self-care, mobility, learning, or communicating; and emotional or behavioral factors, such as anxiety, depression, or making friends.  Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are significantly more likely (31%) to have health conditions that usually or always affect their daily activities somewhat or a great deal compared to those private insurance only (18%) (Figure 5).

As a result of their greater health needs and functional limitations, Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs are significantly more likely to have their education impacted by their health status.  Those with Medicaid/CHIP only (30%) are significantly more likely to have a current special education plan compared to those with private insurance alone (24%). Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs also are significantly more likely (13%) to miss more than two weeks (11 or more days) of school due to illness or injury compared to those with private insurance alone (7%) (Figure 6).

Despite their greater needs, Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are significantly more likely than those with private insurance alone to report that their coverage meets their needs.  For example, Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs (87%) are significantly more likely than those with private insurance only (56%) to report that their coverage is adequate. Two-thirds (66%) of children with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance report that their coverage is adequate, perhaps due to this group’s greater health needs. Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs also are significantly more likely to report that their insurance always allows them to see all needed health care providers, compare to those with private insurance alone (77% vs. 71%).  While access to mental health services can be challenging across payers due to provider shortages, Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs (64%) are significantly more likely to report that their insurance always meets their mental or behavioral needs compared to those with private insurance alone (41%) (Figure 7).

Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs have high rates of access to care; their access is not as high as those with private insurance alone but significantly better than those who are uninsured.  Nearly four in five (78%) Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs report a usual source of care when sick compared to 89% of those with private insurance alone.  The rates for access to a usual source of preventive care (92% for Medicaid/CHIP-only vs. 97% for private insurance only) and for at least one preventive visit in the last year (86% for Medicaid/CHIP-only vs. 91% for private insurance only) are high for both groups. Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs also experience significantly better access to care on these measures compared with those who are uninsured (Figure 8).

Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs are significantly more likely to report that their coverage is affordable compared to those with private insurance alone.  Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs (82%) are more than four times as likely to report that their out-of-pocket health care costs are always reasonable compared to those with private insurance alone (19%).  Over four in 10 (43%) of those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance report that their out-of-pocket costs are always reasonable. Medicaid/CHIP-only children are more than 12 times less likely (3%) to incur annual out-of-pocket costs of $1,000 or more, compared to those with private insurance alone (36%) (Figure 9).

Insurance affordability may be a particular concern for families of Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs because they are significantly more likely to have difficulty covering basic household needs compared to those with private insurance only.  Families of Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are more than two and a half times as likely (53%) to find it somewhat or very often hard to cover basic needs like housing or food since their child’s birth compared to those with private insurance alone (20%) (Figure 9). For an example of how Medicaid helps make private coverage affordable for children with special health care needs, see Gabriel’s story in Box 2 below.

Insurance affordability also is important because the demands of caring for children with special health care needs can impede their families’ ability to work, an outcome that is significantly more likely among Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs compared to those with private insurance only. Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are nearly twice as likely (18%) to live in families who had to reduce their work hours or stop working due to their child’s health needs, compared to those with private insurance alone (10%). Over one-quarter (27%) of those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance live in families who had to reduce their work hours or stop working due to their child’s health needs (Figure 10).

Families of Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs may be less able to work because they are significantly more likely to devote time to meeting their child’s health needs compared to those with private insurance only.  They are three times as likely (12%) to have family members who spend five or more hours per week providing their health care at home, and those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance are over four times as likely, compared to those with private insurance alone (4%).  Medicaid/CHIP-only children with special health care needs are three times as likely (3%) to have family members devoting five or more hours per week coordinating their health care, and those with both Medicaid/CHIP and private insurance are five times as likely, compared to those with private insurance alone (1%) (Figure 10).

Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs experience greater health needs, comparable access to care, and greater affordability compared to those with private insurance alone.  Their families are more likely to have to limit their work hours or stop working as a result of their health and more likely to devote time providing or coordinating their health care.  In addition to filling gaps in private insurance and making coverage affordable, Medicaid is the sole source of coverage for many children with special health care needs in low and middle income families. Medicaid also fills in the gaps in private insurance and makes coverage affordable for children with some of the greatest health care needs.  Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs experience significantly better access to care on these measures compared with those who are uninsured.

Proposals to cap and reduce federal Medicaid funding may pose a particular risk to children with special health care needs because these children use services more intensively, and often incur greater costs, compared to other children.  While Congress did not pass such legislation in 2017, these proposals may resurface in 2018, and the Trump Administration’s FY 2019 proposed budget continues to advance these proposals. Families of children with special health care needs, their providers, states, and other stakeholders may want to consider the implications of these proposals, given the important role that Medicaid plays for children with special health care needs.

source: https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/how-do-medicaid-chip-children-with-special-health-care-needs-differ-from-those-with-private-insurance/