Tag: essential health benefits

New Funding Opportunity Allows States to Bolster Consumer Protections

Posted by

On February 5th, the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight (CCIIO) put out a Notice of Funding Opportunity. The federal agency anticipates that $8.1 million is available for state initiatives focused on insurers’ compliance with federal market reforms and consumer protections, giving states the opportunity to improve their oversight efforts. With the February 26th deadline for letters of intent just around the corner, CHIR’s Rachel Schwab provides an overview of the new grant program.

The Future of the Affordable Care Act under President Trump: Stakeholders Respond to Proposed 2019 Marketplace Rule. Part II: Consumer Advocates

Posted by

The final 2019 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters has been submitted to the White House for review. The initial proposal included a number of changes to the Affordable Care Act’s essential health benefits, marketplace operations, and other consumer protections. In this second post in a series of blogs analyzing public comments on the proposed rules, CHIR’s Rachel Schwab examines responses from a range of consumer advocacy groups to better understand who the rule could impact.

The Future of the Affordable Care Act under President Trump: Stakeholders Respond to Proposed 2019 Marketplace Rule. Part I: Insurers

Posted by

The Trump Administration has proposed a number of changes to the Affordable Care Act’s essential health benefit standard, marketplace operations, and other consumer protections. In this first in a series of blog posts analyzing public comments on the proposed rules, CHIR’s Sabrina Corlette finds that insurance industry responses were not always what you’d expect.

Proposed 2019 Affordable Care Act Payment Rule: A Big Role for States

Posted by

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services published an annual set of proposed rules for the Affordable Care Act marketplaces on October 27. Called the “Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters,” the rules set out expectations for insurers and the states that regulate them. In her latest post for CHIR, Katie Keith highlights key areas in which this administration would give states new autonomy and authority.

State Options Blog Series: Federal Regulators May Weaken ACA Essential Health Benefits Requirements, Creating Need for States to Protect Consumers

Posted by

In the third of a multi-part blog series on state options in the wake of federal actions to roll back or relax Affordable Care Act regulation, Dania Palanker reviews potential changes to the essential health benefit standard and the implications for consumers. She discusses what state legislatures and insurance regulators can do to ensure consumers continue to access affordable health care services.

Graham-Cassidy 2.0: Taking Insurance Protections Out of the Individual Market

Posted by

Another day, another version of the Graham-Cassidy bill. This new version makes numerous technical changes that continue to place health care for the roughly 90 million consumers who rely on the individual health insurance market or Medicaid at risk. CHIR expert Dania Palanker outlines how the bill could affect access to affordable coverage for women, people with chronic illness, older people, and others.

Recent and Potential Regulatory Actions to Roll Back the ACA: State Options Blog Series

Posted by

While members of Congress debate possible bipartisan actions on the ACA, the future sustainability of the ACA’s consumer protections and markets also depend on regulatory and administrative actions. CHIR’s Sabrina Corlette reviews a series of recent actions by HHS to recast the federal approach to health plan oversight and tees up an upcoming series of CHIRblog posts outlining options for states that want to retain some or all of the reforms adopted by the ACA.

Relaxing the ACA’s Regulations: Stakeholders Respond to HHS’ Request for Information: Part 1—Insurers

Posted by

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services asked this spring for public comments on potential changes to the Affordable Care Act. They received over 3,270 comments from a wide range of stakeholders. To better understand concerns related to the law, CHIR experts pulled a sample of comments from health insurers, state regulators, and consumer advocates. In Part 1 of this three-part series, Emily Curran reviews the recommendations of large and small insurers.

What Makes Covering Maternity Care Different?

Posted by

The United States has a higher maternal mortality rate than any other developed country, but federal policy makers are considering reducing access to insurance coverage for pregnancy care. In a post for the Health Affairs blog, CHIR experts Dania Palanker and Kevin Lucia and Harkness Fellow Dimitra Panteli assess the latest policy proposal to allow states to waive out of the requirement that insurance plans in the individual market cover maternity and newborn care.

The opinions expressed here are solely those of the individual blog post authors and do not represent the views of Georgetown University, the Center on Health Insurance Reforms, any organization that the author is affiliated with, or the opinions of any other author who publishes on this blog.