The U.S. Departments of Health & Human Services (HHS), Labor, and Treasury (collectively the “tri-agencies”) have finalized a new federal definition of short-term, limited duration insurance (“short-term plans”). The new policy is effective 60 days after publication of the rule in the federal register, meaning that short-term plans could be available for sale by early October.

Where people live, work and play — and the experiences they have, especially growing up — matters. These social determinants of health (SDOH) include a broad array of social and environmental risk factors such as poverty, housing stability, early childhood education, access to primary care, access to healthy food, incarceration and discrimination. State policy makers are increasingly focused on SDOH because of their important influence on health care outcomes and Medicaid spending.

A major element of the federal legislative proposals to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act is a change to the financing structure for Medicaid. Understanding the effect this funding change will have on Medicaid programs is a critical priority for states. The State Health and Value Strategies program is working to analyze the financing changes from a state perspective.

What does Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) funding have to do with lead abatement efforts? As outlined in a new brief released by SHVS, states have a valuable opportunity to leverage CHIP funding to protect low-income children from lead.

On December 2, 2016, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and other members of House leadership sent a letter to Governors and State Insurance Commissioners seeking input on the repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The letter asked for feedback in nine specific areas.

As states gear up to consider their new budgets, we should expect palpable anxiety about health care spending. States have spent more and more on health care over the years and will be called to do so again. That increased spending hasn’t automatically translated into better health and well-being, though. In fact, many policymakers express concerns that medical inflation crowds out investments in other areas like education, housing, and transportation that tend to prevent issues from escalating into health problems.

Mounting evidence shows progress toward turning the promise of better, more affordable health care into reality. Health reform efforts in recent years have been instrumental in reforming insurance practices, reducing the uninsured rate by a third, and – most exciting for those who work hand-in-glove with state partners – engaging stakeholders across industry and throughout government to forge new partnerships to deliver health care differently.

The State Network serves as a resource for states interested in Section 1332 waivers, also known as State Innovation Waivers, which are shaping up to be an important opportunity for states reaching toward the goal of expanded coverage. We’ll continue to provide analysis and other materials, updating this post as more becomes available.

Recently, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a letter that it sent to Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah regarding Section 1332 Waivers, also known as State Innovation Waivers. These waivers, authorized under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), permit the federal Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Treasury to waive certain aspects of the ACA upon a state’s request. The GAO was asked for information on the status of the waiver review and approval process, and talked to many stakeholders (federal and state officials and advocates) in preparing its response.

The third open enrollment period is coming to an end and the lack of drama may signal an opportune time for states to reassess the exchange model they are using. Certainly, eligibility determination and plan enrollment remain critical. But with many of the kinks and transitions worked out, states have an opportunity to pursue additional policy goals like improving customer service, increasing health plan competition, controlling administrative costs, and promoting delivery system transformation.