Some states are looking for ways to offer more comprehensive or lower-cost health insurance on the individual market and to entice more of those currently uninsured to purchase coverage. One option currently getting the attention of states is Medicaid buy-in.
A Medicaid buy-in option is different from Medicaid expansion efforts under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). A Medicaid buy-in approach can build on a state’s existing Medicaid program infrastructure and offer a Medicaid-like plan to specified residents.
Under a Medicaid buy-in proposal, the core target population would typically be those who are purchasing insurance using advanced premium tax credits (APTCs) or who are eligible for APTCs but uninsured. A Medicaid-buy in may allow individuals not eligible for commercial group coverage to purchase a Medicaid-like plan. This type of proposal may allow a state to replace or augment the current insurance marketplace and ACA premium assistance structure under federal waiver authorities.
States could use their own funds and/or leverage federal funding to develop a buy-in program authorized by a Section 1332 State Innovation Waiver. A state’s goals for a Medicaid buy-in through a 1332 Waiver could be further supported by a Section 1115 Demonstration Waiver or other Medicaid coverage changes.
In this paper, Milliman’s Paul Houchens, Christine Mytelka, and Susan Philip discuss buy-in proposals, exploring the opportunities at a high level and laying out key considerations for states as they weigh their options.
Opioid prescribing nationwide peaked in 2012 at over 80 prescriptions per 100 persons. Between 2012 and 2016, the prescribing rate decreased by almost 20%. Even after this decline, 19% of the U.S. population filled at least one opioid prescription during 2016.
As opioid prescribing declined, many doctors switched to other pain relief drugs. The change in prescribing patterns has potential implications for risk adjustment, because some of the drugs now being used for pain relief were previously flagged in pharmacy-based risk adjustment models as associated with high-cost conditions such as multiple sclerosis.
This brief by Christine Mytelka, Melanie Kuester, Colin Gray, and Lucas Everheart provides data on the decline in opioid prescribing and the increased use of other non-opioid pain relief drugs. Additionally, it addresses the corresponding effect that changing prescribing patterns may have on evaluating population health and risk-adjusted payments in risk-based managed care programs.
Join Milliman’s Christine Mytelka and Andrew Gaffner for the webinar “Medicaid pass-through payment guidance” on Tuesday, May 24, at 12 pm EST. They will provide an overview of pass-through payment provisions in the new Medicaid managed care regulations. This is the first in a series of Milliman articles and webinars focused on the new Medicaid managed care rule. To register, click here.
As managed care has replaced fee-for-service (FFS) in the Medicaid market, states have often sought to replicate fee-for-service supplemental provider payment programs in managed care. Supplemental payment programs, sometimes called upper payment limit (UPL) programs, constitute a major source of revenue for providers in many states. Pass-through payments are the primary mechanism currently used to retain supplemental payment funding in managed care.
Final Medicaid managed care regulations, released April 25, 2016, confirm that pass-through payments will be restricted in the near future and ultimately eliminated. In this paper, Milliman’s Andrew Gaffner, Carmen Laudenschlager, and Christine Mytelka provide an overview of pass-through payment provisions in the new regulations, including the rationale and phase-out timing of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). They also discuss some of the difficulties the loss of pass-through payments will cause for states and providers and suggest a number of potential changes states can consider to mitigate the impact on managed care programs.
Alternative Benefit Plan (ABP) regulations have created the ability for states to offer benefit plans tailored to the needs of a particular population, such as the Medicaid expansion population. These regulations require exemption for vulnerable populations, including one new exempt population: the “medically frail.” This population includes foster care children and those who meet Social Security disability criteria, but also includes anyone with a serious and complex medical condition or a disabling mental or chronic substance use disorder.
States are seeking a methodology to help them identify the medically frail, one that would be both accurate and administratively efficient. This paper describes a methodology that has been used successfully for identifying a similar population in the Healthy Indiana Plan, a Medicaid expansion program initially authorized in 2008 under 1115 waiver authority.