In 2019, the Washington legislature enacted a bill requiring insurers on the state’s health insurance exchange to offer plans with standardized benefit designs, beginning in 2021. Colorado and Maryland are considering similar requirements. As these and other states consider the option of standardized health plans, they can benefit from the experiences of California, the District of Columbia (D.C.), Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, and Vermont, all of which require insurers to offer standardized benefit designs. This Expert Perspective outlines benefits and risks of plan standardization, and raises critical questions that states will need to consider, and offers a decision roadmap for states implementing a standardized benefit design requirement.
Qualified Health Plan Review in Marketplaces with State Plan Management: An Analysis of the Division of Labor Between State Exchanges and Other State Agencies
Gabbie Nirenburg, JD, MS, and Arthur Thourson Jones, PhD, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics
States have implemented a variety of different methods to handle the review and certification of qualified health plans (QHPs). The Health Insurance Exchanges (HIX) Research Group at the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics at Wharton (LDI) recently collected data from 30 states, including those with State Based Marketplaces (SBMs), State Partnership Marketplaces (SPMs), Supported State Based Marketplaces (SSBMs), and Federally Facilitated Marketplaces (FFMs) with state plan management. This brief summarizes the findings within this dataset, which outlines the various plan management and certification functions assumed by different state agencies across these marketplace models.
The full dataset and codebook is available here. The dataset also highlights the role CMS plays in SPM, SSBM, and FFM with state plan management states.