Medicaid Managed Care - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

Medicaid Managed Care - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging Medicaid Managed Care - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

aging.senate.gov
from aging.senate.gov More from this publisher
29.07.2013 Views

310 managed care also requires the commitment of staff who have developed the appropriate expertise in the critical elements of planning and implementing managed care programs. * Hold Harmless Provisions Federal law requires that ong>Medicaidong> beneficiaries are held harmless from financial liability if a plan becomes insolvent States must ensure that HMOs which contract with the state to provide services to ong>Medicaidong> beneficiaries are required to make adequate provision against the risk of insolvency and to assure that ong>Medicaidong> enrollees are in no case held liable for debts of the HMO in the case of insolvency. Additional Cor iderations While the financial solvency of ong>Medicaidong> managed care plans is of paramount importance to departments of insurance, ong>Medicaidong> agencies, and other agencies which regulate ong>Medicaidong> managed care plans, other related considerations must also be considered. The section below does not exhaust the range of issues of concern to regulators, providers and enrollees. It does provide an overview of business and contractual issues with which states must be concerned to facilitate effectively their goal of providing medical assistance beneficiaries with access to quality, cost-effective health care services. * Marketing Issues While marketing activities can be an important component of the process of educating the patient about health plans, it is critical that managed care marketing practices are non-coercive and are designed to provide beneficiaries with accurate information. Federal law requires that states have procedures to monitor enrollment practices of managed care plans. It also requires that prepaid health care contracts specify how the HMO will ensure that the marketing materials that it distributes are accurate and not misleading. To ensure compliance with these and other provisions, many states have developed parameters to regulate ong>Medicaidong> managed care marketing practices. In August 1994, HCFA developed a set of voluntary guidelines, ong>Medicaidong> ong>Managedong> ong>Careong> Marketing Guidelines for States, to assist states which allow health plans to engage in marketing activities. Commercial health insurance companies may use direct and mass marketing strategies to encourage enrollment in their plans within the limitation of state statutes. In the ong>Medicaidong> managed care context, door-to-door marketing has been found to be subject to abuse and has been prohibited by most states. 20 Recently, the state of New York, one of the minority of states which still permitted door-todoor marketing, has decided to ban the use of the practice by HMOs which contract to serve ong>Medicaidong> patients. Many ong>Medicaidong> managed care plans use mass marketing practices and offer incentives and inducements for enrollment while mass marketing. States may wish to examine the impact of offering inducements on the integrity of the enrollment process as well as the impact of mass marketing at times other than open enrollment periods. 20 GAO at 28. ONAIC 1996 t

311 The regulation of marketing practices is an important component of both state and health plans' efforts to protect consumers and to communicate the objectives of a ong>Medicaidong> managed care arrangement. States should, however, be attuned to the broader impact that some marketing regulations will have on enrollment practices of plans, such as their ability to determine the populations for which they will provide or arrange health care services. * Issues related to auto-enrollment Educated consumer choice is key to the success of a managed care program. The automatic assignment of individuals either because the beneficiary did not select at all or because their first selection is closed has the potential to lead to high levels of consumer dissatisfaction and noncompliance. For ong>Medicaidong> managed care programs where beneficiaries are mandated to receive care from a managed care provider, many states have measured the success of their education efforts by reviewing the assignment rate of ong>Medicaidong> beneficiaries. Low assignment rates tend to indicate that beneficiaries are more content with the care provided in the program. States should strive to develop and implement consumer education programs which maximize beneficiary participation. States may also want to examine practices related to the assignment of auto-enrollment populations to low bid plans. Efforts to increase the number of enrollees assigned to a low bidder may minimize the positive benefits to the program derived from consumer choice.' ThTs process also may have implications relating to the relative health risk of auto-enrolled vs. voluntarily enrolled populations, with concomitant financial implications. * Consequences of disenrollment trends and applicability of portability requirements A fundamental premise of managed care is the promotion of primary and preventive health services, plans and payors seek to achieve cost savings through this preventive investment. However, ong>Medicaidong> managed care enrollments are by definition short term (half of all ong>Medicaidong> enrollees lose coverage within 12 months).' Federal ong>Medicaidong> law enables states to guarantee eligibility for a specific period of time beyond changes in a beneficiary's financial status. 24 Some states have taken advantage of this option. When considering whether to guarantee eligibility for a specific length of time, states may need to weigh the costs of guaranteeing longer eligibility against the adverse incentives that could result from shorter enrollment periods. Several states with insurance portability requirements applicable to the commercial sector have also acted to encourage or require commercial plans to "count" ong>Medicaidong> coverage when considering whether the imposition of preexisting condition limitations or waiting periods are appropriate. Ohio, for example, has a statute which recognizes all forms of health plans as satisfying the preexisting 21 GAO at 27; Trish Riley et al., ong>Medicaidong> ong>Managedong> ong>Careong>: The State of the Art, A Guidefor States (National Academy for State Health Policy, 1990), p. 2. 22 "Ten Key Issues for States Under ong>Medicaidong> ong>Managedong> ong>Careong>", George Washington University Center for Health Policy Research. 23 Id. 24 Gencral Accounting Office at 25. CNAIC 1996

311<br />

The regulati<strong>on</strong> of marketing practices is an important comp<strong>on</strong>ent of both state and health plans'<br />

efforts to protect c<strong>on</strong>sumers and to communicate the objectives of a <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g> managed care<br />

arrangement. States should, however, be attuned to the broader impact that some marketing<br />

regulati<strong>on</strong>s will have <strong>on</strong> enrollment practices of plans, such as their ability to determine the<br />

populati<strong>on</strong>s for which they will provide or arrange health care services.<br />

* Issues related to auto-enrollment<br />

Educated c<strong>on</strong>sumer choice is key to the success of a managed care program. The automatic<br />

assignment of individuals either because the beneficiary did not select at all or because their first<br />

selecti<strong>on</strong> is closed has the potential to lead to high levels of c<strong>on</strong>sumer dissatisfacti<strong>on</strong> and<br />

n<strong>on</strong>compliance. For <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g> managed care programs where beneficiaries are mandated to receive<br />

care from a managed care provider, many states have measured the success of their educati<strong>on</strong> efforts<br />

by reviewing the assignment rate of <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g> beneficiaries. Low assignment rates tend to indicate that<br />

beneficiaries are more c<strong>on</strong>tent with the care provided in the program. States should strive to develop<br />

and implement c<strong>on</strong>sumer educati<strong>on</strong> programs which maximize beneficiary participati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

States may also want to examine practices related to the assignment of auto-enrollment populati<strong>on</strong>s to<br />

low bid plans. Efforts to increase the number of enrollees assigned to a low bidder may minimize the<br />

positive benefits to the program derived from c<strong>on</strong>sumer choice.' ThTs process also may have<br />

implicati<strong>on</strong>s relating to the relative health risk of auto-enrolled vs. voluntarily enrolled populati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />

with c<strong>on</strong>comitant financial implicati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

* C<strong>on</strong>sequences of disenrollment trends and applicability of portability requirements<br />

A fundamental premise of managed care is the promoti<strong>on</strong> of primary and preventive health services,<br />

plans and payors seek to achieve cost savings through this preventive investment. However, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

managed care enrollments are by definiti<strong>on</strong> short term (half of all <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g> enrollees lose coverage<br />

within 12 m<strong>on</strong>ths).' Federal <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g> law enables states to guarantee eligibility for a specific period<br />

of time bey<strong>on</strong>d changes in a beneficiary's financial status. 24 Some states have taken advantage of this<br />

opti<strong>on</strong>. When c<strong>on</strong>sidering whether to guarantee eligibility for a specific length of time, states may<br />

need to weigh the costs of guaranteeing l<strong>on</strong>ger eligibility against the adverse incentives that could<br />

result from shorter enrollment periods.<br />

Several states with insurance portability requirements applicable to the commercial sector have also<br />

acted to encourage or require commercial plans to "count" <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g> coverage when c<strong>on</strong>sidering<br />

whether the impositi<strong>on</strong> of preexisting c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> limitati<strong>on</strong>s or waiting periods are appropriate. Ohio,<br />

for example, has a statute which recognizes all forms of health plans as satisfying the preexisting<br />

21 GAO at 27; Trish Riley et al., <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Managed</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Care</str<strong>on</strong>g>: The State of the Art, A Guidefor States<br />

(Nati<strong>on</strong>al Academy for State Health Policy, 1990), p. 2.<br />

22 "Ten Key Issues for States Under <str<strong>on</strong>g>Medicaid</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Managed</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Care</str<strong>on</strong>g>", George Washingt<strong>on</strong> University Center for Health<br />

Policy Research.<br />

23 Id.<br />

24 Gencral Accounting Office at 25.<br />

CNAIC 1996

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!