Tag: state-based marketplace

How Did State-Run Health Insurance Marketplaces Fare in 2017?

Posted by

In a new Commonwealth Fund issue brief, CHIR’s Justin Giovannelli and Emily Curran interviewed leadership staff of 15 of the 17 state-run marketplaces to understand how states on the forefront of health reform perceived and responded to federal policy changes and political uncertainty in 2017. Their research finds that federal administrative actions and repeal efforts created confusion and uncertainty in 2017 that negatively affected state-run markets.

Affordable Care Act Navigators: Unexpected Success During 2018 Enrollment Season Shouldn’t Obscure Challenges Ahead

Posted by

Heading into open enrollment for 2018 marketplace coverage, experts predicted far fewer people would sign up for coverage. Despite the obstacles working against a successful open enrollment, sign-ups came close to last year’s tally: federally facilitated marketplaces (FFMs) logged 8.8 million plan selections, including close to 2.5 million new consumers, by the close of open enrollment on December 15th, nearing the 9.2 million plan selection from the previous year in just half the time. CHIR’s Olivia Hoppe and JoAnn Volk take a look at what explains the better-than-expected results.

Insurer Participation in ACA Marketplaces: Federal Uncertainty Triggers Diverging Business Strategies

Posted by

A reliable indicator of health insurance markets’ stability is insurer participation, including the number of insurers that elect to sell individual plans and whether they participate over subsequent years. In a recent analysis for the Commonwealth Fund, CHIR experts looked at insurer participation in the state-based Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplaces from 2014 to 2018, which sheds light on how state marketplaces have maintained competition despite uncertainty about the law’s future.

State-Based Marketplaces Push Ahead, Despite Federal Resistance

Posted by

Open enrollment for 2018 started last week on the Affordable Care Act’s health insurance marketplaces. Along with its executive actions designed to weaken marketplaces operations, the Trump administration has taken a number of steps over the past year to curb marketplace enrollment. While the administration has scaled back efforts to provide health coverage, state-based marketplaces have taken a different approach. In their latest post for The Commonwealth Fund’s To The Point blog, CHIR’s Emily Curran and Justin Giovannelli share their findings from interviews with executives at 15 of the 17 states that operate their own marketplaces.

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.

States Work to Preserve Affordable Care Act Progress amidst Federal Disorder

Posted by

It’s been a bumpy year for state insurance and marketplace officials, thanks to considerable uncertainty over the future of the ACA. CHIR’s Emily Curran highlights recent action suggesting that some states may be poised to reassert their authority over their insurance markets, as they work to maintain the ACA’s coverage gains and keep their markets stable.

2017 Federal and State Marketplace Trends Show Value of Outreach

Posted by

The fourth open enrollment period ended in early 2017, with dwindling momentum behind enrollment efforts at the federal level following the presidential election. In a new publication for the Commonwealth Fund, Emily Curran, Sabrina Corlette, Kevin Lucia and Justin Giovannelli provide an overview of potential factors influencing enrollment changes in the state-based marketplaces, including increased efforts that may have had a positive effect on final selections.

Proposed Trump Administration Rule Shortens Open Enrollment: Policy Goals, Potential Impact, and State Options

Posted by

In February, the Trump administration proposed a number of rules that they hope will stabilize the individual market. One of these rules would cut this year’s open enrollment period from 90 days to 45 days. While HHS argues that the shorter timeframe could streamline the enrollment process and improve the risk pool, other health care stakeholders have expressed concern that a shortened OE might dampen enrollment and overwhelm state-based marketplaces. With the final rule expected any day, what are the possible impacts of shortening the annual enrollment period? CHIR’s Rachel Schwab takes a look.

Proposed Pre-Verification Process for Special Enrollment Periods: Policy Goals, Potential Impact, and the need for State Flexibility

Posted by

In the wake of failed congressional attempts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, we turn back our focus on the administration and its approach to the marketplaces. The proposed market stabilization rule would require a pre-verification process for special enrollment periods for all marketplaces, including states operating their own. This move is largely in response to insurer concerns, indicating an interest in working with participating marketplace insurers. But how does this fare with states that have their own special enrollment processes? CHIR’s Sandy Ahn takes a look.

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.