Blog Home

Archive for the 'Consumers' Category




Exhibit Of The Month: California’s Hospital Fair Pricing Act Reduces Amount Paid By Uninsured


January 29th, 2015

Editor’s note: This post is part of an ongoing “Exhibit of the Monthseries. Readers who’d like to highlight other noteworthy exhibits from the same issue are encouraged to make their pitch in the comments section below.

This month’s exhibit, published in the January issue of Health Affairs, looks at the proportion of hospital charges to and collections from uninsured patients in California from 2003 to 2012.

In the article, “California’s Hospital Fair Pricing Act Reduced The Prices Actually Paid By Uninsured Patients,” author Ge Bai of the Williams School of Commerce, Economics, and Politics at Washington and Lee University, examines how the Hospital Fair Pricing Act affects the net price paid by uninsured patients.

Read the rest of this entry »

Competition In Health Care Markets


January 26th, 2015

In this post, I want to focus on the key role economic analysis plays in the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)’s health care enforcement program. I use this lens to look first at how the FTC has become more successful in challenging hospital mergers, and then to rebut the notion that the Affordable Care Act is somehow a “free pass” for health care industry consolidation.

After the federal antitrust agencies successfully challenged a number of hospital mergers in the 1980s and early 1990s,[1] we suffered a string of court losses in the mid- and late-1990s, even in cases involving highly concentrated hospital markets.[2] In 2002, the FTC decided to take a step back and examine the reasons for our losses, and whether our analysis of hospital markets was correct.

We engaged in an in-depth retrospective study, used our authority to collect data from hospitals and insurance companies, and held workshops along with DOJ. (See here, here, here, and here.) Cory Capps of Bates and White, and other economists contributed significantly to our understanding as well. This intense period of reflection led to several important papers demonstrating that the consummated mergers stemming from the hospital merger challenges we lost—including those involving non-profits—resulted in anticompetitive effects, particularly increased prices. We also determined that our losses were due in part to the courts’ acceptance of faulty economic analysis of geographic and competitive effects. (See here, here, and here.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Beyond Law Enforcement: The FTC’s Role In Promoting Health Care Competition And Innovation


January 26th, 2015

By now, the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) law enforcement efforts in the health care area are well known. We have successfully challenged several hospital and physician practice mergers in the last few years. We also continue to pursue anticompetitive pharmaceutical patent settlements, following a victory at the Supreme Court in the Actavis case. Speaking of the Court, it is currently reviewing a case we brought against the North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners, alleging that its members conspired to exclude non-dentists from providing teeth whitening services in North Carolina.

Perhaps less publicized are the FTC’s various non-enforcement efforts in health care. Arguably most significant among those is the advocacy that the agency conducts in favor of competition principles before state legislatures and other policymakers. I will discuss our advocacy efforts in the health care space in this post, and then turn to the subject of telemedicine, an area in which FTC competition policy may play a significant role.

Read the rest of this entry »

Additional Requirements For Charitable Hospitals: Final Rules On Community Health Needs Assessments And Financial Assistance


January 23rd, 2015

On December 29, the Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service released long-awaited final regulations implementing Affordable Care Act provisions that impose additional obligations on charitable hospital organizations covered by §501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.  Published in the Federal Register on December 31 2014, the regulations are massive, consolidating a series of prior proposals into a single final body of regulatory law.  The regulations affect more than 80 percent of U.S. hospitals, both the 60 percent that operate as private nonprofit entities and the 23 percent that operate as governmental units.

Because state and local governments typically condition their own sales, property, and corporate income tax exemptions for nonprofit entities to a hospital’s §501(c)(3) status, the final regulations carry broad and deep implications from both a policy and financial perspective.  According to the Congressional Budget Office the 2002 the national value of the federal tax exemption exceeded $12 billion, a figure that undoubtedly has risen considerably.

Read the rest of this entry »

Academic Medical Centers Should Lead The Charge On Price Transparency


January 21st, 2015

A bipartisan campaign to increase price transparency in the medical world has been reverberating through the press, government, and hospitals. Recent examples include CMS’ release of datasets for inpatient and outpatient charges and North Carolina’s House Bill 834, which was signed into law on August 21, 2013 and mandates that the state’s Department of Health and Human Services publish hospital charges. In Time Magazine, Steven Brill’s article, “Bitter Pill,” provided stunning real world examples of how the lack of price transparency can create enormous uncertainty and confusion among both patients and providers.

The momentum will only continue as Section 2718(e) of the Affordable Care Act is implemented. The provision, which took effect on October 1, 2014, mandates that each hospital establish, update, and publicize a list of standard charges for items and services provided. At this critical moment, there is one set of institutions that are uniquely positioned to ensure that price transparency is implemented deliberately and successfully: Academic Medical Centers.

For good reason, there is excitement about the potential of the price transparency movement. A recent Health Affairs study by Wu et al. suggests that when patients have access to health care prices for an intervention such as an MRI, a significant number select the lower-price option. This proof of concept shows that price transparency has the potential to lead to competition between hospitals, thus reducing costs to the patient and health care system.

Read the rest of this entry »

Implementing Health Reform: FAQs On Taxes And The ACA (January 24 Update)


January 13th, 2015

In the next few days, consumers who enrolled in qualified health plans through the marketplaces in 2014 will begin receiving IRS form 1095-As from the marketplaces, be they the federally facilitated marketplaces (FFMs) or state-operated marketplaces.  The form 1095-A is the form that provides individuals who have enrolled in qualified health plans through the marketplaces the information they need to fill out form 8962, which in turn is the form enrollees will need to reconcile the advance premium tax credits (APTC) they received in 2014 with the premium tax credits they were actually entitled to.  The marketplace also reports the information on the 1095-A to the IRS.

On January 12, 2015, HHS released a series of frequently asked questions about the 1095-A at its REGTAP website, which are reviewed here. This post also briefly covers other ACA-related developments.

Read the rest of this entry »

Sovaldi, Harvoni Payment Issues Lead Health Affairs Blog November Most-Read List


December 24th, 2014

A piece by Laura Fegraus and Murray Ross on the challenges of paying for lifesaving but high-priced drugs like Sovaldi and Harvoni from was the most-read Health Affairs Blog post for November. This was followed by a critical analysis of workplace wellness programs from Al Lewis, Vik Khanna, and Shana Montrose.

Next came a post on the 2016 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters Proposed Rule from Tim Jost, and then a look at health care policy after the mid-term elections from James Capretta.

The full top-ten list for November is below.

Read the rest of this entry »

Health Insurance Rate Setting: Time To Raise The Bar And Lift The Veil Of Secrecy


December 24th, 2014

Over 15 million Americans stand to benefit from a strong health insurance rate review system, with the number growing each year. But in many states the rate review laws—and how they are carried out—fall short. Health insurance is one of the most expensive purchases consumers make, it is vital to the financial and physical health of their families, and it is required under the Affordable Care Act.

It is, therefore, important for insurance regulators to ensure consumers pay a fair price for their coverage. At the recent National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) meeting, we, along with two other organizations, presented a set of recommendations designed to strengthen the rate review process at both the state and federal level so that all consumers will be assured fairly priced health insurance.

The Affordable Care Act introduced new, important protections for consumers, while at the same time retaining a large role for state policy and regulation. This framework resulted in inconsistent policies across states. States that expanded Medicaid sit adjacent to states that did not. Some states operate their own insurance Marketplace, while consumers in other states use the federal Marketplace.

Read the rest of this entry »

Implementing Health Reform: Proposed Changes To Summary Of Benefits And Coverage, Uniform Glossary (Updated)


December 23rd, 2014

On December 22, 2014 the Departments of Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services, stubbornly refusing to allow the rest of us to start our holidays, released a joint notice of proposed rulemaking to amend the Summary of Benefits and Coverage and Uniform Glossary rule (fact sheet).  In conjunction with the proposed rule, the Departments released a proposed updated Uniform Glossary and proposed updated summary of benefits and coverage (SBC) templates, SBC language, instructions, and coverage example narratives and calculators.  The changes proposed will be effective as of the first open enrollment period or plan year beginning on or after September 1, 2015.

The Affordable Care Act requires health insurers to offer to group health plans, and health insurers and group health plans to offer to their applicants and enrollees, SBCs that summarize the coverage offered by the insurer or plan, including coverage and limitations, through the use of a common SBC template.  The SBC allows potential groups and applicants to comparison shop among potential plans, but also helps enrollees to better understand the coverage offered and limitations and restrictions imposed by the plan in which they are enrolled.

The initial SBC rule, promulgated early in 2012, was the end product of a lengthy process and was based on the recommendations of a panel convened by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.  Since the 2012 rule was issued, however, the agencies have released a stream of frequently asked questions modifying, clarifying, and conditioning the 2012 rules. (FAQs Parts VII, VIII, IX, X, XIV, and XIX) The proposed regulations and accompanying documents incorporate much of this interim guidance, and they update the 2012 rule to take account of the changes made in insurance markets by the 2014 reforms.

Read the rest of this entry »

New Health Policy Brief: Reenrollment


December 22nd, 2014

This year open enrollment under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) began on November 15, allowing new customers to sign up for health insurance. Open enrollment also provided current policyholders the chance to change plans and request a redetermination on the amount of subsidy they received. During this second year of open enrollment for the ACA’s insurance Marketplaces, insurers and policy makers are working to keep last year’s enrollees in the system — and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) estimates that 95 percent of them are eligible for automatic renewal.

A new policy brief from Health Affairs and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) examines the pros and cons of reenrollment options for consumers, whether they are using the federal Marketplace or live in states that operate their own exchanges. Automatic reenrollment means that almost seven million people already enrolled will not necessarily need to flood HealthCare.gov and exchanges during open enrollment. On the other hand, it also may discourage consumers from exploring alternative coverage that might better fit their needs and get a more accurate determination of eligibility for subsidies.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Medicare Shared Savings Program: CMS Turns To Stakeholders On Incentivizing ACO Risk


December 19th, 2014

On December 1, 2014, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) released its long awaited Proposed Rule to update regulation and operation of the Medicare Shared Savings Program (“MSSP”). In response to concerns raised by participating accountable care organizations, CMS proposes to revise the MSSP program in several ways to provide greater flexibility for ACOs.

However, in important areas CMS may not have gone far enough. This post describes the framework CMS has set forth and then suggests several ways in which the proposal could, in our view, be improved to achieve the CMS objective of encouraging ACOs to bear more risk. In particular, CMS should consider using its waiver authority more robustly; allowing Medicare beneficiaries to designate their primary care providers, and by extension their ACO; and revising the MSSP risk-adjustment methodology to better reflect the changing risk profiles of ACOs.

CMS is actively seeking stakeholder input, which may indicate agency recognition that further changes beyond those in the propose rule are needed. By all indications, stakeholder input will be seriously considered; more than any time in recent memory, stakeholder comments will make a difference in the shape of the Final Rule. This presents a unique opportunity for stakeholders and we urge concerned parties to share their perspectives through comments – the deadline for submitting comments is February 6, 2015.

Read the rest of this entry »

Implementing Health Reform: Enrollment And Reenrollment For 2015 (Updated)


December 16th, 2014

The December 15, 2014 deadline for reenrolling in qualified health plan (QHP) coverage to assure continuous coverage as of January 1, 2015 has come and gone.  Individuals who were enrolled through the federally facilitated marketplace (FFM) for 2014 but did not return to the marketplace to shop for 2015 plans will be passively reenrolled in their 2014 plan or in a plan similar to it.  The 2015 open enrollment period lasts through February 2015, and individuals can return to the FFM at any time before then to change plans.  But the change will not be effective for January 1.

A number of state-operated exchanges—including New York, Massachusetts, Idaho, Rhode Island, Washington, Minnesota, and California—have reportedly either extended the date by which individuals can enroll or reenroll and still have coverage effective January 1 or given individuals who had begun the enrollment process as of December 15 extra time to complete the process for January 1 coverage.  The FFM has not extended the deadline.

Read the rest of this entry »

Two Theologies Have Blocked Medicare-For-All


December 11th, 2014

Editor’s note: This post is part of a series of several posts stemming from presentations given at “The Law of Medicare and Medicaid at Fifty,” a conference held at Yale Law School on November 6 and 7.

In the 50 years since Medicare was enacted, Congress has never seriously considered extending Medicare to all Americans, nor even lowering Medicare’s eligibility age below 65. This pattern persisted even during those periods when national health insurance was at the top of the national agenda. This is not what the original advocates of Medicare anticipated when Medicare was enacted in 1965. They saw Medicare as the cornerstone of a national system of health insurance that would eventually cover all Americans.

Two Myths that Undercut Medicare-for-All: Managed Care and Competition

In the paper we presented at the Yale conference, we reviewed short- and long-term factors affecting the debate about Medicare over its lifetime, and then turned to a discussion of two long-term factors: the rise of what came to be called the managed care movement, and the resurgence of a longstanding campaign promoting the idea that competition can right the wrongs of American medicine.

Read the rest of this entry »

What To Watch For During This Year’s Open Enrollment Period: Lessons From The Health Reform Monitoring Survey


December 10th, 2014

The Obama Administration recently lowered its expectations on the number of individuals that are likely to enroll in health insurance plans through the Marketplace by the end of 2015—suggesting that it might be more difficult than expected to find and enroll remaining uninsured residents while retaining people who signed up during the first open enrollment period (New York Times; Wall Street Journal; Washington Post’s “Wonkblog”).

One potential barrier to enrollment is low levels of Marketplace awareness among the uninsured: September 2014 estimates from the Urban Institute’s Health Reform Monitoring Survey (HRMS) indicate that only 52 percent of uninsured adults reported hearing some or a lot about the health insurance Marketplace created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Despite this large knowledge gap, awareness of the Marketplace has improved since last September, when only 30 percent of the uninsured reported hearing some or a lot about the Marketplace prior to the first open enrollment period.

While increasing awareness of the Marketplace will continue to be important as the second open enrollment period unfolds, there are two additional issues that may determine how many more uninsured people actually gain coverage this year. First, will the remaining uninsured be reluctant to seek coverage and enroll during the current open enrollment period, and if so, why? Second, for people seeking information on health plans, what sources of information are they likely to turn to, and will those sources be adequate to meet the demand?

Read the rest of this entry »

From The National Coordinator For Health IT: The Federal Strategy For Collecting, Sharing, And Using Electronic Health Information


December 8th, 2014

Making our nation’s health and wellness infrastructure interoperable is a top priority for the Administration, and government plays a vital role in advancing this effort. Federal agencies are purchasers, regulators, and users of health information technology (health IT), as they set policy and insure, pay for care, or provide direct patient care for millions of Americans. They also contribute toward protecting and promoting community health, fund health and human services, invest in infrastructure, as well as develop and implement policies and regulations to advance science and support research.

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC) has a responsibility to coordinate across the federal partners to achieve a shared set of priorities and approach to health IT.  To that end, today we released the draft Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020, and we are seeking feedback on the federal health IT strategy.  This Strategic Plan represents the collective priorities of federal agencies for modernizing our health ecosystem; however, we need your input. We will accept public comment through February 6, 2015. Please offer your insights on how we can improve our strategy and ensure that it reflects our nation’s most important needs.

A collection of 35-plus federal departments and agencies collaborated to develop the draft Federal Health IT Strategic Plan: 2015-2020, identifying key federal health IT priorities for the next six years (Exhibit 1). The landscape has dramatically changed since the last federal health IT strategyWhen we released that Plan, the HITECH Act implementation was in its infancy. Since then, there has been remarkable growth in health IT adoption. Additionally, the Affordable Care Act implementation has begun to shift care delivery and reimbursement from fee-for-service to value-based care.

Read the rest of this entry »

Implementing Health Reform: Federal Exchange Reenrollment And More (Updated)


December 2nd, 2014

On December 1, 2014, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released a Guidance for Issuers on 2015 Reenrollment in the Federally facilitated Marketplace (FFM).  This guidance sets out in great detail—with clarifying examples—the process which the FFM and insurers will use to send and receive enrollments and reenrollments for 2015, including the process that the FFM will use to communicate to an insurer when a 2014 enrollee selects a different insurer for 2015 coverage.  The guidance is primarily directed at insurers but should also be of interest to consumers and those who are assisting them.  It demonstrates, I believe, a much higher degree of planning and intentionality than was evident in the 2014 open enrollment period, when enrollment rules often seemed to be developed on the fly.

This post describes the reenrollment guidance, as well as initial enrollment figures for the FFM and other ACA-related developments.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Payment Reform Landscape: Tying It All Together


December 2nd, 2014

Throughout 2014, Health Affairs Blog has been generous in allowing us to share our insights and opinions on a monthly basis as we examine the evidence for different payment reform models. Along this journey, we’ve taken an in-depth look at how well different payment models are proving to enhance the quality and affordability of care.

We’ve taken a few detours to explore some of the building blocks of a higher-value health care system, like price transparency. And we took some time to share findings from our 2014 National Scorecard on Payment Reform, which revealed the commercial sector is moving toward more value oriented payment.

So with 2015 almost upon us, what did we learn from all this exploration? And based on our learnings, what are the logical next steps for our work at Catalyst for Payment Reform (CPR), and for health care leaders’ efforts as they think about moving the needle on payment reform?

Read the rest of this entry »

Implementing Health Reform: Minimum Essential Coverage And The Multi-State Plan


November 24th, 2014

Two earlier posts this past weekend analyzed the massive Department of Health and Human Services 2016 Benefit and Payment Parameter Proposed Rule, released on November 21.  Also on November 21, the Internal Revenue Service of the Department of the Treasury released a final rule on Minimum Essential Coverage and Other Rules Regarding the Shared Responsibility Payment for Individuals, while the Office of Personnel Management released proposed modifications to the multi-state plan (MSP) program rule.  This post explores these rules.

Minimum Essential Coverage

The ACA requires Americans to either maintain “minimum essential coverage” (MEC) or pay a tax.  There are a number of exceptions to the requirement, however, and the concept of MEC can become quite complicated.  The final rule published by the IRS provides guidance as to the meaning of MEC and the rules governing some of the exceptions.

Read the rest of this entry »

Implementing Health Reform: 2016 Benefit And Payment Parameters Proposed Rule, Insurance Provisions


November 23rd, 2014

On November 21, 2014, the Centers on Medicare and Medicaid Services of the Department of Health and Human Services released its proposed Benefits and Payment Parameters (BPP) RulePart I of this post examined the benefit provisions of this proposed rule. This post will analyze the parts of the rule that deal with the insurance market reforms; the reinsurance, risk adjustment, and risk corridor programs; health insurance rate review; and the individual and SHOP exchanges.

New Definitions Of ‘Plan’ And ‘State’

The regulation begins with a modified definition of the term “plan.”  The terms “plan” is important in the ACA regulations.  A plan has been defined, with respect to a health insurer, as the combination of a benefit package, metal tier, and service area.  The new definition adds to this combination cost-sharing structure and provider network, so that plans that differ in their cost-sharing structure (deductibles, copayments, or coinsurance) or provider networks are different plans, even if they are offered at the same metal tier.  This definition becomes important, for example, in determining whether a plan offered outside the exchange is the same as a qualified health plan (QHP) offered in the exchange and can thus participate in the risk corridor program.  The proposed regulations later propose that the unreasonable rate review regulation applies at the plan level.

Read the rest of this entry »

Implementing Health Reform: 2016 Benefit And Payment Parameters Proposed Rule, Consumer Provisions; Hardship Exemptions


November 22nd, 2014

On November 15, 2014, the marketplaces reopened for 2015.  Anecdotal reports indicate that in most places enrollment and reenrollment are running smoothly.  But the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is looking forward to 2016.  On November 21 CMS published its massive 2016 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters (BPP) Proposed Rule  with accompanying fact sheet.  It also published the draft 2016 actuarial value calculator and draft actuarial value calculator methodology for 2016.  Finally, CMS published a guidance on hardship exemptions for certain individuals.

Not to be outdone, the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service released its final regulation on Minimum Essential Coverage and other Rules Regarding the Shared Responsibility Payment for Individuals, together with a Notice regarding Individual Shared Responsibility Payment Hardship Exemptions that May be Claimed on a Federal Income Tax Return Without Obtaining a Hardship Exemption Certificate from the Marketplace and a Revenue Procedure setting out indexed adjusted percentages of income that will be used for determining the level of contributions expected of individuals before premium tax credits become available, the affordability threshold for the shared responsibility payments unaffordability exemption, and the threshold for determining whether employer coverage is affordable for purposes of determining eligibility for tax credits.

Finally, the Office of Personnel Management released a lengthy proposed rule proposing modifications in the multi-state plan program.  These rules, proposed rules, and guidances will be addressed in a series of posts over the next several days.  This post will address primarily the consumer-facing provisions of the BPP proposed rule, focusing on changes in benefits.  A second post will follow, discussing the provisions of the rule more relevant to insurers, such as proposed changes in the reinsurance, risk adjustment, and risk corridor rules.  A final post will discuss the IRS rule, which is primarily a finalization of proposals and guidances already made public, and the OPM multi-state plan rule.

Read the rest of this entry »

Click here to email us a new post.