OBJECTIVES: We estimated rates of diabetes care indicated services in adult type 2 diabetics in a state Medicaid population and associations between receipt of services in Fee-For-Service (FFS); Care Management (CM), i.e., fee-for-service plus care coordination; and Managed Care (MC) subprograms. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of Indiana Medicaid 2006 and 2007 eligibility, claims, and encounter files was conducted. Persons 18 to 64 y/o, with diabetes based on ICD-9 codes or NDC codes, and ≥12 months continuous eligibility in one subprogram were included.  Exclusions included no evidence of a diabetes diagnosis prior to study intervals or death prior to the end of intervals. Indicated services based on ADA guidelines for lipid (LI) , retina examinations (RE), microalbuminuria (MA), serum creatinine (SC), influenza vaccinations (FV), and A1c tests were identified from CPT codes and HCPCS codes ( ≥ 2 annually for A1c tests and ≥1 annually for other tests).  Logistic regression assessed associations between subprogram and assessments controlling for age, gender, ethnicity, comorbidity, and state region. RESULTS: A sample of 22,017 persons, with 57% FFS, 26% CM and 17% MC was identified.  Overall, proportions (95% C.I.) meeting recommendations were 63.5%, (62.9 – 64.1) SC, 37.2% (36.5 – 37.8) LI, 30.5% (29.9 – 31.1) RE, 23.3% (22.8 – 23.9) MA, 18.2% (17.6 – 18.7) FV, and 15.6% (15.1 – 16.1) A1c tests. Compared to FFS, odds ratios ranged from 1.38 for RE to 4.74 for LI under CM and excluding RE which did not differ, 1.39 for FV to 3.78 for LI under MC (P ≤ 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: While A1c rates are likely low due to low claims submission for point of service A1c tests, other rates are likely representative.  Associations between subprograms and assessments may indicate strategies such as chronic disease management and primary care coordination may be effective in increasing diabetes care assessments.