The brief provides an overview of the most recent changes to the Graham-Cassidy repeal and replace proposal and a just-released preliminary analysis of the proposal by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). On September 13th, Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA)—along with Senators Dean Heller (R-NV) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) and former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)—released a new proposal to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA). On September 25th, the sponsors released several updates to the proposed legislation. Also on September 25th, the CBO provided its preliminary analysis of one of the earlier versions of the bill.
In a final effort to pass a bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act before reconciliation instructions expire on September 30th, Senators Graham and Cassidy are advancing a proposal that would retain many key provisions of the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA) – including per capita caps for Medicaid non-expansion populations – and replace federal funding for tax credits, cost sharing reductions, Medicaid expansion, and the Basic Health Program with a capped allotment that would be distributed to states in the form of a block grant.
An overview of the proposal released on September 13th by Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA)—along with Senators Dean Heller (R-NV) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) and former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)—to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This is an updated version of the proposal that Senators Graham and Cassidy filed on July 27th. The Graham-Cassidy Affordable Care Act (ACA) repeal and replace legislation would retain many features of the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA) voted down by the Senate on July 25th, including per capita caps on Medicaid spending and elimination of the individual and employer mandates. However, it also goes beyond that proposal by converting Marketplace and Medicaid expansion federal funding into a block grant.
Federal funding for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is set to expire on September 30th, raising multiple issues for states. State Health and Value Strategies, in partnership with technical experts from Manatt Health, hosted a webinar to discuss key considerations for states as Congress debates CHIP reauthorization. Topics included the funding level and duration of the extension, maintenance of the 23 point FMAP bump, maintenance of effort requirements, and operational implications of reauthorization timing.
The expiration of Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) funding on September 30, 2017 raises four critical issues for states: 1) the timing of reauthorization, and what the level of allotment and duration of any extension will be, 2) whether the 23 percent increase to federal matching funds will continue, 3) whether maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements will continue unchanged, and 4) operational considerations for states, including notices to members and budget planning.
This brief provides an overview of the proposal developed by Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and filed on July 27th as a substitute for the American Health Care Act passed by the House to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The proposal retains many features of the July 20th version of the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA) released by Senate leadership (and rejected by the Senate on July 25th), including per capita caps on Medicaid spending and elimination of the individual and employer mandates.
State policy makers are increasingly focused on social determinants of health (SDOH) because of the important influence of these determinants on health care outcomes and Medicaid spending. This issue brief digs into opportunities that states have to account for SDOH in Medicaid programs.
State policy makers are increasingly focused on social determinants of health (SDOH) because of the important influence of these determinants on health care outcomes and Medicaid spending. This webinar includes an overview of the methods for gathering SDOH data, and the range of possible uses of the data by state policy makers. It also explores how states could factor SDOH into improved payment models and quality measurement activities. Lastly it describes a new payment model that Massachusetts Medicaid is using to adjust managed care payments for certain social risk factors among enrolled populations.
State Health and Value Strategies, a program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, is pleased to publish the second in our series of webinars for state officials on achieving population health goals.
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.