Apr 18, 2018

First Focus;

CHIP covers those who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to be able to purchase health insurance coverage on their own. CHIP's supporters recognized the value of investing in children's coverage to make sure that all children have access to the medical care they need to grow up to become healthy and productive adults.CHIP has a long history of bipartisan support from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who recognize that providing health coverage for our nation's children is a critical investment in America and its future. If funding for CHIP is not extended beyond FY 2017, the remarkable trend toward universal coverage for children would most certainly be reversed and significant numbers of children would become uninsured.

Mar 28, 2018

Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation;

A substantial body of research has investigated effects of the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on coverage; access to care, utilization, affordability, and health outcomes; and various economic measures. This issue brief summarizes findings from 202 studies of the impact of state Medicaid expansions under the ACA published beginning in January 2014 (when the coverage provisions of the ACA went into effect) and updates earlier versions of this brief with studies through February 2018.1 More recent studies continue to support earlier findings but provide additional findings in key areas, including expansion's effects on health outcomes, access to services and medications for behavioral health and other needs, and providers' financial stability.

Mar 28, 2018

Manhattan Institute;

Congress has struggled for decades to reform Medicare's fee-for-service payment system, which has driven up the cost of American health care by reimbursing medical providers for services, regardless of their value or quality. The most recent attempt at reform, the 2015 Medicare and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA), seeks to quantify the value of care delivered and to get medical practices to bear some responsibility for the aggregate costs associated with a course of treatment.To do so, the law provides higher payments to clinicians who participate in Alternative Payment Models (APMs), in which practices are penalized for excessive aggregate costs associated with the delivery of a full course of treatment. Most medical practices have balked at APMs, which require them to bear substantial financial risks. These practices, however, will become subject to a complex grading mechanism, the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), which will adjust Medicare payments to clinicians in line with their performance relative to peers on a vast array of performance metrics. Yet the federal agency tasked with overseeing this scoring system has publicly declared MIPS to be unworkable and called for its repeal.The fact that Medicare has inadvertently encouraged the proliferation of low-value services does not mean that it is capable of transforming health care for good by identifying and rewarding high-value care. It would be enough to avoid doing harm. That goal can be accomplished if APMs were to give clinicians full credit for treating patients enrolled in Medicare Advantage—which would eliminate the risk to taxpayers of inflated volumes of low-value services, while freeing medical practitioners from arbitrary and counterproductive regulations.

Mar 26, 2018

Georgetown University Center for Children and Families;

Notes: Children are defined as under 18 years of age. Children with two or more types of coverage are not included in the map. A dash indicates that the percent of children with Medicaid/CHIP coverage in the county are unreported on the map because there are fewer than 10 children residing in the county. Source: Georgetown University Center for Children and Families analysis of the five-year estimates of summary data from the 2016 American Community Survey (ACS). The U.S. Census Bureau publishes ACS summary data on American Fact Finder. Percent estimates were computed.

Mar 22, 2018

Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; Women's Health Policy;

The role of government in regulating abortion coverage began to be debated shortly after the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Roe v Wade. Since 1976, the Hyde Amendment has blocked federal funds under Medicaid and other federal programs from being used to pay for abortion, allowing exceptions only for pregnancies that endanger a woman's life, or that result from rape or incest. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) interpreted the federal abortion-funding ban to include the federal tax credits that functioned as premium subsidies to help individuals afford Marketplace plans. This issue brief reviews current federal and state policies on private insurance coverage of abortion services, and how the Bipartisan Health Care Stabilization Act of 2018 would affect abortion coverage for women enrolled in the individual market.

Mar 20, 2018

Georgetown University Center for Children and Families; Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation;

This 16th annual 50-state survey provides data on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) eligibility, enrollment, renewal and cost sharing policies as of January 2018. It takes stock of how the programs have evolved as the fifth year of implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) begins, discusses policy changes made during 2017, and looks ahead to issues that may affect state policies moving forward. It is based on a survey of state Medicaid and CHIP officials conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families.Key FindingsMedicaid and CHIP provide a robust base of coverage for low-income children. All but two states cover children with incomes up to at least 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL, $41,560 per year for a family of three in 2018), including 19 states that cover children with incomes at or above 300% FPL. The ten-year extension of federal funding for CHIP approved by Congress provides states stable funding to maintain children's coverage and continues protections for children's coverage moving forward.There have been major gains in Medicaid eligibility for parents and other adults under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion, but eligibility remains limited in the 19 states that have not implemented the expansion. Among non-expansion states, the median eligibility level for parents is 43% FPL ($8,935 for a family of three in 2018) and other adults generally are ineligible. Alabama and Texas have the lowest parent eligibility limits at 18% FPL or $3,740 per year for a family of three. Additional states may expand Medicaid for adults in the coming year, which would reduce the number of poor uninsured adults who fall into the coverage gap. States moving forward with expansion may seek waivers to add requirements or restrictions for adults as a condition of expanding.Through significant investments of time and resources, most states have transformed their Medicaid and CHIP enrollment and renewal processes to provide a modernized, streamlined experience as outlined in the ACA. With these processes, a growing number of states are processing real-time eligibility determinations and automated renewals through electronic data matches with trusted data sources. Looking ahead, waivers and other proposed changes for adults, including premiums and cost sharing, work requirements, and lockout periods, require complex documentation and costly administrative processes that run counter to the simplified enrollment and renewal processes states have implemented under the ACA.

Mar 19, 2018

Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center on Health Insurance Reforms; Urban Institute;

A new report, supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and authored by Georgetown CHIR and Urban Institute researchers, examines how uncertainty over the long-term future of the ACA have affected insurers' participation and premium setting decisions for the 2018 and 2019 plan years. We interviewed 10 insurance companies participating in the individual market in 28 states and D.C. and a few key takeaways include:The rollback of the ACA's individual mandate led insurers to implement higher premiums in 2018 and will likely drive premiums even higher in 2019. However, insurers' views differed on the impact of repealing the individual mandate. Some felt it would ultimately lead to a collapse of the market and are considering further retrenchment; others felt confident that a market for highly subsidized, low-income consumers would continue.The midyear loss of the ACA's cost-sharing reduction plan reimbursements drove 2018 premium increases ranging from 10 percent to 20 percent. However, several insurers noted that proposed federal legislation to restore cost-sharing reduction funding could result in significant disruption and sticker shock for consumers receiving premium tax credits.All insurers had concerns regarding an expansion of short-term and association health plans under the President's October 12, 2017 executive order. Insurers worry that an expansion of these plans could siphon healthy people away from the individual market, leaving a sicker, costlier population.Insurers with narrow provider networks reported concerns about the potential exit of competing insurers, noting that their network providers lacked capacity to take an influx of new, often sicker enrollees. They further noted that unexpected insurer exits can produce considerable disruption, particularly if remaining insurers lack sufficient time or ability to readjust their pricing.A worsening of the risk pool will likely cause many insurers to reduce their market presence, will cause all insurers to raise their premiums, and may lead to more exits.