Last week, I wrote about the states that have decided not to
expand Medicaid this year. The decision
will cost them in money and lives.
But the 24 (and counting) states that have chosen to expand Medicaid will face
challenges of their own. As a new
article in Health Affairs Blog reveals, expanding states will have plenty to do
to assure that the benefits of expansion reach those most in need.
The article, entitled Lessons
of Early Medicaid Expansions Under the Affordable Care Act, reviews the
experiences of five states and the District of Columbia in expanding Medicaid
benefits to additional populations using authority granted to them under
Obamacare. The five states were
Connecticut, California, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Washington.
All of the states were able to capture federal dollars to
support state or local low-income insurance programs. But, according to the authors, there were seven
lessons these states learned that could be warning signs to other states
banking on the savings.
One lesson was that
they could not predict the size of their eligible populations as well as they
thought they could.
For example, when Connecticut’s expansion was approved in
2010, it was
estimated that 45,000 people would be affected. By May of 2013, over 90,000
had been enrolled. So while
Connecticut may have saved $50 million on the first 45,000; it may have spent all
of that on the second.
Connecticut will still benefit in the long run – the original
expansion took place under the old federal reimbursement rate. Higher reimbursement begins in 2014.
But I spoke recently with one former state official, who
echoed the concerns of others. He said that taking
into consideration all of the state’s financial difficulties in recent years, perhaps
the state should have waited to expand.
Another lesson was
that it was not as easy to enroll newly eligible people as the states thought it
would be.
On the surface, enrollment seemed straightforward enough. If a person’s income was below a certain
cut-off – 138 percent of poverty – he or she was eligible under the expansion
and could enroll.
But this presumes that people are following the news as
closely as our public officials do. And
it also presumes that they can easily calculate how much income 138 percent of
poverty means for them, taking into account their own family situation. Finally, it presumes that they can get to the
right place to file an application and verify their income, their address, and other
information.
Beyond that, once they were enrolled, they often moved or
had other changes in their status. And
that meant making certain that the state found them at their new address and captured
up-to-date information.
The federal government anticipated these challenges when it
provided for more navigators to assist with enrollment. But not every state is on board with the widespread
use of navigators. Even though Florida chose not to expand Medicaid, it still passed
a law this year placing some
unnecessary and onerous registration requirements on the new navigators. States following Florida’s lead may discourage
both Medicaid and private insurance enrollment in general.
The authors also found
that expanding states were covering more people with mental illnesses than they
anticipated.
To anyone following the implementation of Obamacare closely,
this is no surprise. The mental health coverage
required by both Obamacare and the soon-to-be-implemented Mental Health Parity Act
is far more generous – and fairer – than it has ever been.
The authors think that the jury is out on whether every expanding
state will experience this. The early
expanders typically focused on very poor people, and there may be more people
with mental illness in this group than in the poor and near-poor populations
most affected by Medicaid expansion. We
will find out soon enough whether this is so.
Finally, the authors
also noted that the political context for expansion is important.
At bottom, states that want to provide coverage to more
people will find a way to do it. Those
that do not, will not.
But in every state, the political drumbeat for better
coverage is going to get louder over the next year or two.
And, according to the authors, the drumbeat
may be loudest among the safety net providers.
Hospitals and community health centers have the most to gain by
expansion, and the most to lose in states where the numbers of uninsured remain
the highest.
Paul Gionfriddo via email: gionfriddopaul@gmail.com. Twitter: @pgionfriddo. Facebook: www.facebook.com/paul.gionfriddo. LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/paulgionfriddo/
This should be interesting...
ReplyDeleteAt bottom, states that want to provide coverage to more people will find a way to do it. Those that do not, will not.
I know where CT stands as far as this piece. From what I've seen so far is the benefits are substandard compared to typical insurance plans. Also it Iooked like the deductible was very high making it unaffordable for many. I am watching this like a hawk. CT is not making decisions in the best interest of the disadvantaged as far as I have experienced raising a disabled child. I hope that Obamacare levels the playing field.
What is the reimbursement rate for 2014 ?
My friend told me about your blog and I like you after reading it. Many thanks for what you have supplied.
ReplyDeleteLumigan