The American Health Care Act (AHCA), as passed by the House of Representatives on May 4, 2016, would overhaul federal financing of state Medicaid programs, and for the first time, would cap federal Medicaid funding. As policymakers debate the potential implications of per capita caps, it has been suggested that per capita caps are really no different than Medicaid managed care—a concept with which states are fully familiar and well able to manage. This policy brief tests that hypothesis by examining the similarities and differences between the federal per capita cap and a state’s per capita “cap” in Medicaid managed care spending.
Following the House’s passage of the American Health Care Act (AHCA) and the Senate’s on-going repeal and replace negotiations, it is clear that significant changes to federal Medicaid financing remain in play. Building on past State Network webinars that have reviewed the AHCA Medicaid financing provisions and identified their implications for states, the State Network, in partnership with technical experts from Manatt Health, held a webinar that provided a deep-dive on critical issues that will influence the impact of capped funding on states, including choice of base year, trend rates, and treatment of supplemental payments. The discussion was informed by updated modeling based on the House-passed version of the AHCA.
Medicaid’s unique and critical role in responding to events such as the opioid and HIV/AIDS epidemics, the 2001 World Trade Center attacks, the Flint, Michigan lead contamination crisis, and Hurricane Katrina are discussed in this brief.
Driven to improve care coordination and contain costs by moving away from a volume-based payment model, an increasing number of states are implementing risk-based managed care programs to deliver long-term services and supports (LTSS). As the primary payer for LTSS, state Medicaid programs have a significant interest in ensuring that entities with which they contract deliver high quality and cost-effective care to members. This issue brief identifies ways states can learn from value-based payment models being applied elsewhere to create more accountability for the quality and cost of LTSS.
Health Savings Accounts have been a frequent topic of conversation for policy options in the ACA markets. HSAs have gained attention in recent years as they are featured in both “Repeal & Replace” and Medicaid proposals. This webinar reviewed the basics of HSAs, how they have been considered under various repeal and replace proposals, and how alternative Medicaid expansions have used HSA-like programs for enrollees.
As states seek to understand the impacts of proposed changes to Medicaid financing, comparative data on where states stand can be very valuable. The memos included here use state-specific data to analyze the impact of proposals to limit federal Medicaid funding on all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
The American Health Care Act has a number of policy changes that impact state Medicaid programs. This webinar featured experts at Manatt Health as they review implications on Medicaid Financing, Eligibility and other programmatic changes for states. The attached slides provide significant insight into eligibility changes, the policy principles of the per capita cap and block grant models, and an in-depth explainer of the creation of per-capita caps for states.
Medicaid Expansion and Enhanced Match: How Proposals to Grandfather Medicaid Enrollees Could Impact States
Some federal proposals implement enrollment freezes for the Medicaid Expansion population, while grandfathering the enhanced match for enrollees that remain in the system. States have experiences with enrollment freezes in recent years and the changes in enrollment levels provide lessons for states moving forward. This issue brief, authored by the team at Manatt Health, highlights the experiences of three states and how enrollment freezes impact state Medicaid rolls.
While the focus of debate regarding repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been on Marketplaces and the Medicaid expansion, myriad other provisions of the ACA are at risk of repeal—including those that streamline Medicaid eligibility and enrollment systems and implement a national, simplified standard for income eligibility. As of January 2016, 37 states are able to complete an eligibility determination in real time, defined as less than 24 hours, and among these, 11 states report that at least half of their applicants receive an eligibility determination in real time. The future of the ACA’s streamlined eligibility and enrollment-related provisions and the system improvements states have invested in to implement them are the subject of this issue brief.
Because Medicaid is the single largest payer in every state, governors are using Medicaid to drive multi-payer reforms, including adoption of value-based payment methodologies and advancement of population health models. Proposals being considered by Congress and the new administration to repeal the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) Medicaid expansion and implement limits on federal Medicaid funding through block grants and per capita caps could have a significant impact on these advances. This issue brief, developed by Manatt Health, considers how much states have accomplished to drive value in and through their Medicaid programs over the last 50 years, and most especially over the last five years, and what states stand to lose in terms of progress and innovation in their Medicaid programs and health care delivery systems if federal support for Medicaid is reduced.