In this season of gratitude and joy, we reflect on a year filled with purpose and partnership. At ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨, we’re honored to support our clients and partners working to improve the health of individuals, families, and communities nationwide.
Watch our videoÌýto find out what fuels our passion to create a positive impact in all the work we do, from addressing health equity and improving maternal outcomes to advancing healthcare policy and helping organizations deliver the highest quality care.
All of us at ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ are wishing you a joyous holiday season and new year filled with continued success.Ìý
1005 Results found.
MyCare Ohio: The Next Generation’s impact on the Ohio Medicare & Medicaid landscape
The transition of MyCare Ohio to the Next Generation of its program on January 1, 2026, marks a significant evolution in the way Ohio provides healthcare services to its dual-eligible population – those who qualify for both Medicaid and Medicare services.ÌýThis evolution moves Ohio to a Fully Integrated Dual Eligible Special Needs Plan model (FIDE SNP) that aims to achieve several key goals through a population health approach, designed to address inequities and disparities in care for dual-eligible individuals.ÌýThese goals include:
- Improved Care Coordination. Strengthening integration between Medicare and Medicaid services to provide seamless, holistic care for individuals, reducing fragmentation and ensuring comprehensive management of medical, behavioral, and social needs.
- Personalized Care. Utilizing data analytics and technology to create more tailored care plans, with a focus on proactive care to address the unique health needs of each individual, especially those with chronic conditions.
- Expanded Access to Services. Increasing accessibility, particularly through telehealth and digital tools, to reach underserved populations and improve convenience for patients, particularly those in rural or remote areas.
- Enhanced Quality of Care. Shifting focus from service volume to outcomes, encouraging providers to deliver high-quality care and improve patient satisfaction, while incentivizing preventive care to reduce hospital admissions and other high-cost interventions.
- Technology Integration. Leveraging advanced technologies like mobile apps, predictive analytics, and telemedicine to monitor patient health, improve communication between patients and providers, and enable more efficient care delivery.
The current MyCare program is offered in 29 counties across Ohio but will transition to a statewide program as a part of the Next Generation changes. Additionally, Coordination Only Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (CO DSNP) will no longer be permitted.
After the Ohio Department of Medicaid (ODM) publicly released the request for applications (RFA) and evaluated submitted proposals, they selected four Managed Care Organization (MCOs) that will become the Next Generation MyCare plans. The ODM awarded the following MCOs to serve MyCare members beginning in January 2026: Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Buckeye Health Plan, CareSource, and Molina HealthCare of Ohio.
The shift to the FIDE SNP model and selection of four participating health plans will have a considerable impact on the competitive landscape for Medicare and Medicaid managed care in Ohio. The resulting changes can affect both selected and non-selected participants in different ways, including:
- Increased competition among chosen MyCare MCOs. MCOs will need to focus on enhancing their care coordination systems, adopting new technologies, and developing personalized care plans to compete not just on the volume of services provided but also on the quality and effectiveness of care. Those who can best integrate services, offer proactive care management, and improve patient outcomes through value-based care and advanced technology initiatives will gain the competitive advantage, potentially attracting more beneficiaries.
- Strategic responses of nonparticipating MCOs to counter potential membership and financial losses. MCOs that lose membership by not being selected, or are unable to offer CO DSNPs moving forward, will likely strategize how to gain membership through other product lines or benefit design to offset losses. Strategies may vary but could include tactics such as enhancing benefits or decreasing member cost shares to entice member movement across carriers for non-DSNP plans; finding innovative ways to further reach different segments within the Medicare population, such as Value Based Insurance Design (VBID) packages or Chronic SNP plays; or shifting focus to product lines outside of Medicare Advantage and Medicaid.
Ohio is one of many states transitioning to a FIDE model beginning January 2026. ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ (ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨) has successfully supported participating and non-participating carriers throughout the transition process and continues to be a dedicated partner to organizations navigating Medicare and Medicaid changes across the country. Contact one of ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨â€™s many experts for more details on how to navigate this evolution in health care.
Major Changes to Medicare Advantage and Part D Proposed by CMS for 2026
This week’s In FocusÌýsection examines a comprehensive proposed rule that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)ÌýÌýon November 26, 2024. These highly anticipated regulations—which represent the last major Medicare regulations from the Biden Administration—include several significant andÌýÌýdesigned to strengthen plan oversight and enhance beneficiary protections for millions of Medicare beneficiaries who have coverage through Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part D plans beginning in contract year 2026. The rule also comprises proposals with fiscal and policy implications for state Medicaid programs.
Comments on the proposed rule are due by January 27, 2025, and the incoming Trump Administration could make significant changes before finalization. New administration officials may choose to delay certain provisions, scale back, or eliminate certain proposed policy changes when they finalize the regulations next year.
This article explains several of the proposed policies, considerations for healthcare stakeholders, and developments that ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ (ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨) experts will be tracking in the coming weeks.
Coverage of Anti-Obesity Medications Under Medicare Part D and Medicaid
In the proposed regulations, CMS seeks to expand coverage of anti-obesity medications (AOMs) under the Medicare Part D and Medicaid programs. Under current Medicare Part D coverage rules, medications used exclusively for weight loss are excluded from the definition of a Part D covered drug. Through the proposed change, CMS is seeking to align Medicare and Medicaid coverage policy with the prevailing medical consensus that recognizes obesity as a chronic disease.
Under the proposed reinterpretation, CMS would expand eligibility for Part D coverage of AOMs for Medicare beneficiaries with obesity. AOMs used for weight loss or chronic weight management would continue to be excluded from Part D coverage under the proposed regulation.
As it relates to Medicaid, CMS’s proposed reinterpretation would require Medicaid coverage for anti-obesity medications when used for weight loss or chronic weight management for the treatment of obesity. State Medicaid programs would continue to have discretion to use preferred drug lists and prior authorization (PA) to establish certain limitations on the coverage of these drugs, consistent with existing statutory requirements.
CMS estimates the proposal would increase federal costs by $24.8 billion as the result of expanded Part D coverage and $14.8 billion because of expanded Medicaid coverage over a 10-year period.
Key considerations: Though expanded access to innovative medications may improve access and outcomes for obese patients, these considerations may need to be balanced against the proposal’s considerable fiscal costs. In addition, key health nominees put forth by President-Elect Donald J. Trump have different views about how best to prevent and treat chronic disease, creating additional uncertainty about whether this proposed expansion will go forward.
Strengthening Prior Authorization and Utilization Management Guardrails
The proposed rule includes a series of recommendations for reforming Medicare Advantage PA, utilization management (UM), and coverage decisions, which include:
- Defining the meaning of internal coverage criteria to clarify when MA plans may apply UM
- Ensuring MA plans’ internal coverage policies are transparent and readily available to the public
- Requiring plans to inform beneficiaries of their appeal rights
- Revising the current metrics for the annual health equity analysis on the use of PA to require more detailed and granular reporting to allow CMS to determine whether MA plans disproportionately deny certain services
Key considerations: Continued scrutiny of MA plans’ PA practices and strong bipartisan support for reforms increase the likelihood that certain changes will be made to these policies within the next year.
Enhancing Medicare Plan Finder to Include Information on Plan Provider Directories
Another notable proposal would require MA plans to make provider directory data available to CMS for inclusion in Medicare Plan Finder (MPF), the online tool that allows beneficiaries to compare coverage options, including Medicare Advantage and Part D plans. At present, provider directories must be accessible on MA plans websites.
CMS seeks to enhance MPF with searchable provider information for all MA plans while requiring plans to attest to the accuracy of the provider directory data, including updating data within 30 days of receiving notification that provider information has changed. CMS would ensure compliance with this expectation by requiring plans to meet data compliance and quality checks, which will be detailed in upcoming technical guidance.
Improving Access to Behavioral Health Care
The proposed rule furthers federal policymakers’ initiatives to address the nation’s behavioral health crisis. CMS proposes to establish the following three standards to ensure that beneficiary cost sharing in Medicare Advantage is no greater than in Traditional Medicare:
- A 20 percent coinsurance or an actuarially equivalent copayment rate for mental health specialty services, psychiatric services, partial hospitalization, and outpatient substance abuse services
- No cost sharing for opioid treatment programs
- All (100 percent) of the estimated Traditional Medicare cost sharing for inpatient psychiatric services
Improve Oversight and Administration of Supplemental Benefits
MA plans may offer a variety of supplemental benefits such as vision, dental, and gym memberships, which have come under increasing scrutiny by CMS. CMS proposed several actions to reduce misuse of these benefits, including:
- Outlining proper usage by MA organizations and enrollees
- Adding disclosure rules for transparency
- Ensuring enrollees can access covered services through alternative methods
- Requiring real-time electronic links between debit cards and covered services
- Defining acceptable over-the-counter products.
Key Considerations: CMS officials in President-Elect Trump’s first administration expanded flexibility for plans to offer supplemental benefits. Incoming policy officials may seek an opportunity to fully review the Biden Administration’s proposals. Data and experience-informed comments from MA plans and stakeholders can support such discussions.
Improve Care Experience for Dual Eligibles
CMS proposed the following two new federal requirements for Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs) that are applicable integrated plans (AIPs):
- AIP D-SNPs will need to have integrated member ID cards for their Medicare and Medicaid plans.
- D-SNPs will be required to conduct an integrated health risk assessment for Medicare and Medicaid, rather than separate ones for each program.
Key Considerations: These proposals further CMS’s multi-year work to advance integrated care by applying Medicare-Medicaid Plan features into D-SNP requirements. States and MA and Medicaid plans should plan for operational and policy changes if the proposals are finalized.
Formulary Inclusion and Placement of Generics and Biosimilars
CMS proposes to require Part D formularies to provide beneficiaries with broad access to generic, biosimilar, and other low-cost drugs while also ensuring that tier placement and UM practices do not limit access to these drugs as compared with more expensive brand name and reference products.
Key considerations: If finalized, the proposal would require MA-PD and Part D plans to update their approach and considerations for plan formulary development. Consumer groups and other stakeholders should consider the possibility that the proposal will improve access to lower cost products.
Other Topics in the Proposed Rule
In addition, the proposed rule calls for the following:
- Guardrails for artificial intelligence to protect access to health services, such as requiring that MA plans ensure services are provided equitably, regardless of delivery method or origin (i.e., human or automated systems)
- Changes to MA and Part D medical loss ratio (MLR) reporting to improve the meaningfulness and comparability of MLR across plan contracts
- Expanded Part D medication therapy management eligibility criteria
- Adding and updating measures addressed in this proposed rule, beginning with the 2028 Star Ratings
- Promoting community-based services and enhancing transparency of in-home service providers, including new definitions and standards for community-based organizations
- Codifying existing guidance related to implementation of the Medicare Prescription Payment Plan, which is part of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)
What to Watch
During the lame duck session, Congress could advance legislation related to some proposals in this rule. Specifically, PA has been an area of significant bipartisan interest, along with access to and cost of GLP-1 products. CMS will need to ensure the final MA and Part D policy and technical rule for contract year 2026 reflects approved statutory changes.
In addition, ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ is watching key appointments within the US Department of Health and Human Services, including individuals selected to lead CMS’ Medicare and Medicaid centers. These appointments will provide valuable insights on the emerging policy agenda of the incoming administration.
Connect with Us
ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨â€™s Medicare and Medicaid experts will continue to assess and analyze the policy and political landscape, which will determine the final policies in the MA and Part D policy and technical rule for contract year 2026. ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨â€™s experts have the depth of knowledge, experience, and subject matter expertise to assist organizations that engage in the rulemaking process and to support implementation of final policies, including policy development, tailored analysis, and modeling capabilities, as well as quality improvement initiatives and plan benefit design.
For further analysis of the MA and Part D proposed rule and potential impact on MA and Part D plans, Medicaid programs, providers, and beneficiaries, contactÌýour featured experts below.
December 4, 2024
CMS Proposes Major Changes to Medicare Advantage and Part D for 2026
Has Medicare’s Drug Policy Struck the Right Balance Between Access and Cost?Ìý
Kevin Kirby, managing director at ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨, gives a closer look at the evolution of Medicare’s drug coverage and the policies that have transformed patient access and affordability. From Clinton era ideas, to the launch of the Medicare Modernization Act and then the Affordable Care Act, Kevin has advised clients as these significant milestones have shaped and reshaped Medicare’s drug benefits. He discusses the implications of the Inflation Reduction Act, raising important questions about sustainability and cost control. The episode will explore how these pivotal policies will impact access to treatment and the sustainability of Medicare in a rapidly changing healthcare landscape.Ìý
Strategic Expenditure Planning: Empowering County Government Agencies to Optimize Opioid Settlement Funds
The Client
The Lake County Behavioral Health Services Department and the residents of Lake County, California.
Background
In 2021, opioid manufacturer Janssen Pharmaceuticals along with three opioid distributors, McKesson, Amerisource Bergen, and Cardinal Health (collectively known as The Distributors) reached settlements for their roles in the opioid epidemic that amount to $26 billion. These settlements will be distributed to states that participated in the joint lawsuits. It is estimated that California will receive approximately $2.05 billion over 18 years to focus on opioid abatement activities within the state. As a participating subdivision, Lake County is set to receive a portion of California’s Abatement Fund and began receiving payments on November 15, 2022. The County will receive approximately $18 million over the course of eighteen years.
ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ was tasked with creating an expenditure plan for the opioid abatement settlement funds distributed to the Lake County Behavioral Health Services Department and the residents of Lake County. ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ facilitated community engagement to gather stakeholder feedback and align community priorities with the High Impact Abatement Activities (HIAA) and goals as defined by the California Department of Healthcare Services.
Download and read the approach and results.
ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ webinars offer insights into big changes expected after the 2024 election
Following the 2024 election, incoming federal officials have begun to lay the groundwork for significant changes in the federal policy landscape and agency operations. In 2025, Republicans will control the executive branch and both chambers of Congress, a trifecta of power that affords more opportunity for advancing their federal healthcare agenda over the next two years. ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ consultants are available to help organizations understand, inform, and plan for future federal policy initiatives and the impact for publicly funded programs and the healthcare sector.
Experts from ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ and from Wakely and Leavitt Partners, both ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ companies, collaborated to host three webinars that examine key issues and considerations for different parts of the healthcare sector.
Ìý
This webinar explored insights on the election results, discussed both confirmed outcomes and remaining uncertainties, along with the mandate for change that has emerged. Panelists from ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ and Leavitt Partners provided an overview of what to expect from Congress and the Administration, focusing on key legislative priorities and executive actions, and shared their prediction for what to watch over the first 100 days.
With a Republican majority in Congress and presidency, healthcare priorities are expected to include revisiting ACA tax subsidies, addressing Medicaid allotments, and reexamining Medicare’s system for reimbursing providers. Powerful tools like budget reconciliation could drive major changes in tax and healthcare entitlement programs, however, this tool can be limited by parameters of the Senate’s procedural rules, known as the Byrd Rule.
Panelists also addressed the regulatory policy landscape which could include reinstating Trump-era policies like the 1332 waivers, allowing non-ACA plans, and altering Medicare and Medicaid policies to emphasize transparency and fiscal responsibility.
The Future of Medicare Advantage: How the Election Results Impact the Program
With Medicare Advantage (MA) a key area of focus for incoming federal agency leaders, experts from ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨, Leavitt Partners, and Wakely discussed how the election results will impact what policy changes could be considered in the coming year.
As the MA program expands, conversations about its future reveal a mix of partisan priorities and bipartisan opportunities. Partisan changes are likely to include moderation of regulatory oversight, and the possibility of easing the audit process and restrictions on payment models. Other strategies and policies may shift the emphasis away from health equity initiatives and revise the federal approach to competitive prescription drug pricing negotiations.
There are, however, certain reforms that are likely to garner bipartisan support, such as the expansion of telehealth services and increased access to behavioral healthcare. Ongoing discussions about health plans’ approaches to prior authorization and management of prescription drug will likely remain a bipartisan priority.
Electoral Consequences: Impact on the ACA Marketplace
The 2024 elections may lead to significant changes in the ACA Marketplace. Enhanced ACA subsidies available during the COVID-19 pandemic are set to expire in 2025, and the new CMS administrator will shape policy and regulatory components that affect marketplace and consumer dynamics.
Key insights highlight anticipated changes to the Meaningful Difference Rules for non-standard plans, an increase in Marketplace user fees, and a proposal to codify silver loading into regulation. Additionally, it’s important to monitor policy areas focused on improving compliance among agents and brokers in the Marketplace the unveiling of a new Risk Adjustment model and coefficients to reflect costs that are not related to active medical conditions.
Our consultants are ready to meet with you to discuss any projects or ideas to help you navigate the evolving landscape in 2025.
Insights into federal approval of Medicaid-covered traditional healing to improve culturally relevant care for AI/AN populations
This week’s In FocusÌýsection reviews new state initiatives to cover traditional healing services through Medicaid for American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) individuals and communities.Ìý
Overview
In October 2024, The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicaid Section 1115 demonstration amendments for , , , and , allowing Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) coverage of traditional healing services delivered at or through Indian Health Service facilities, Tribal facilities, and urban Indian organizations (I/T/U facilities).
This demonstration approval enables state Medicaid agencies to acknowledge traditional healthcare practices as important components of the wellness continuum of care for Native American populations. Medicaid funding will help strengthen and expand access to these services and support integration of these services into primary care, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and other behavioral health care in a way that I/T/U providers have designed and developed to meet the unique needs of their community.
Demonstrations for Arizona and Oregon are approved through September 30, 2027, New Mexico’s demonstration is authorized through December 31, 2029, and California’s through December 31, 2026.
Traditional Health Services: Providing Culturally Relevant Care
AI/AN populations generally experience worse health disparities compared with non-AI/AN populations, particularly in terms of obesity, diabetes, tobacco addiction, and cancer. AI/AN populations also face higher rates of mental health disorders, SUDs, and suicide.
Using Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) claims and demographics data, ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨, Inc. (ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨), staff assessed the incidence of specific chronic diseases in the Native American and non-Native American population in the four states approved to cover traditional healing services through their Medicaid program. For example, in these states, the prevalence of diabetes in AI/AN populations ranged from 27 percent to 87 percent higher than among non-AI/AN groups. Figure 1 shows the percentage of three chronic conditions among these groups in the four states.
Figure 1. Percentage of AI/AN vs. Non-AI/AN Medicaid Beneficiaries Living with Chronic Conditions in AZ, CA, NM, and OR (2022)
The demonstration approval is expected to improve access to culturally appropriate healthcare to address these disparities in chronic conditions for Tribal communities. Traditional healthcare practices vary widely across the 574 federally recognized Tribes in the United States, and many see traditional healthcare practices as a fundamental element of well-being that can help patients with specific physical and behavioral health conditions. For example, commonly offered traditional practices in Native American communities include talking circles, sweat lodges, and smudging. Studies show that incorporating traditional healthcare practices may improve mental health symptoms, outcomes, and quality of life, including among individuals with SUD.
Considerations for Key Partners
AZ, CA, NM, and OR are the first states to receive federal approval and will lay the groundwork for integrating time-honored healing practices into their Medicaid systems. They also could serve as a model for other states that choose to pursue this demonstration. I/T/Us were integral to shaping the demonstration design and are poised to continue shaping the program details and implementation of traditional approaches to care into their Medicaid systems.
ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ experts identified some key considerations for partners, such as states and Medicaid managed care organizations (MCOs), to follow as these services are incorporated into Medicaid:
- Collaborate with I/T/U facilities and communities.ÌýTraditional healing practices are sacred and ceremonial, so flexibility will be essential in determining how Medicaid funding can be best allocated to support providers who offer traditional practices. Communities will be critical in helping identify the specific traditional healing practices that are needed.Ìý
- Support operational changes needed in I/T/U facilities.ÌýCompliant and efficient billing practices will be essential to the success of the demonstrations. States can support I/T/U facilities to develop necessary trainings, workflows, and administrative processes. For example, the provider qualification criteria and implementation is central to meeting federal compliance and reporting requirements. Facilities also will need to meet Medicaid billing requirements to collect 100 percent of the federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP).Ìý
- Partner with I/T/U facilities. To facilitate proper care coordination, states, health plans, and non-I/T/U providers should partner with I/T/U facilities to ensure patients experience the best health outcomes.Ìý
Connect With Us
ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ has learned the value and importance of working with Native American and Alaska Native populations and respecting their unique approaches to improving healthcare. ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨ has expertise on healthcare issues that uniquely affect AI/AN populations and is experienced in addressing these challenges through AI/AN leadership and engagement that is culturally sensitive and respectful. Our experience working directly with Tribes encompasses extensive and applicable knowledge of healthcare operations in rural and urban settings to support infrastructure needs, including data management, IT, staffing, policies and procedures, training, and eligibility and enrollment processes.
Contact our featured expert belowÌýto learn more about ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨â€™s work to support Native American and Alaska Native communities.Ìý
November 20, 2024
Improving Culturally Relevant Care for AI/AN Populations: Insights into Federal Approval of Medicaid-Covered Traditional Healing
Health policy priorities on the table: Understanding the post-election landscape for Marketplace, Medicaid, and Medicare programs
This week’s In Focus section addresses post-election implications and initial considerations for understanding President-Elect Donald J. Trump’s possible federal healthcare policy agenda. Though healthcare was not the highest priority campaign issue, the president-elect and his team have signaled the policy agenda could include changes to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Medicaid, and the nation’s public health programs.
Additionally, President Trump’s first term policy agenda and how these policies fared, provide critical insights into the policy direction for his second term, including policies on Medicare drug pricing, ACA marketplaces, and interoperability. Also vital to understanding and planning for a second term will be the appointees to key healthcare positions at the Department of Health and Human Services and in the White House.
Policy officials and specific policy agendas are still nascent, and ºìÁì½í¹Ï±¨, Inc., federal and state experts are continuing to monitor these developments. The remainder of this article focuses on a few key considerations for the Marketplace, Medicaid, and Medicare healthcare insurance programs heading into 2025.
ACA Marketplace Issues to Watch
President-Elect Trump signaled he is uninterested in revisiting a legislative initiative to repeal and replace the ACA. However, one of the major defining issues facing the president-elect and the next Congress is the temporary policy providing enhanced tax credits that lower ACA premiums, which expires at the end of 2025. This and other tax policies are very likely to be on the table, particularly as budget reconciliation is an available tool in unified government.
Key considerations for healthcare stakeholders regarding the subsidy policy and federal funding for Marketplace outreach and education programs include:
- The Congressional Budget Office (CBO)ÌýÌýthat extending the present enhanced subsidy policies would cost more than $300 billion over 10 years. The CBO alsoÌýÌýthat ACA marketplace enrollment would drop from 22.8 million in 2025 to 18.9 million in 2026 if the subsidy policy is not renewed.Ìý
- The loss of subsidies would increase the number of uninsured individuals in the United States, but the size of the increase would depend on the state-specific landscape. For example, states that have not adopted the ACA’s Medicaid expansion for adults are expected to have a higher increase relative to states that have more expansive Medicaid eligibility. One potential approach is for lawmakers to modify the enhanced subsidy policy, rather than let it expire entirely.
- Marketplace plans should be prepared for a change in the acuity mix of enrollees while providers should expect a change in their payer mix, with more uninsured individuals in states that have not expanded Medicaid.
Federal and state policymakers may pursue a combination of alternatives to fill gaps in access to healthcare coverage and services. For example, the president-elect and incoming congressional leaders may focus on alternative coverage options and other state-driven reforms to Marketplace programs. Alternatives that could become part of the regulatory policy agenda include:
- Supporting association health plans (AHPs) and high-risk pools
- Reverting to a federal regulatory environment that supports short-term limited-duration healthcare insurance (STLDI) plans
- Approving Section 1332 waivers to allow state-designed programs
Medicaid Policy Outlook
During Mr. Trump’s first term, one of his administration’s signature was approving Section 1115 demonstrations that allowed states to apply work requirements to certain populations, including adult expansion populations. The first Trump Administration also revised the demonstration parameters for Section 1115 Institutions for Mental Disease (IMD), allowed coverage lockout for beneficiary noncompliance with premium payments, and a pilot program to test interventions addressing health-related social needs (HRSNs).
Key considerations for healthcare stakeholders regarding Medicaid flexibilities and funding include:
- Officials in the first Trump Administration approved Medicaid 1115 demonstration program to address HRSNs. President Biden’s Administration expanded these policies and approved demonstrations in more than 10 states, with additional state applications pending. Incoming officials may maintain the overall policy direction with regard to HRSNs. However, they could pivot to narrow the scope of future state HRSN proposals. Another approach could include directing states to use in lieu of services (ILOS) authority in managed care delivery systems to address HRSN.
- During President-Elect Trump’s first term, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) officials prioritized work requirements and for certain components of a state’s Medicaid program. Some states might consider revisiting these options, with modifications. If this policy direction is refreshed, federal and state officials would benefit from the foundational work conducted during the first term.
- New CMS officials could prioritize work on transparency in Medicaid financing and reimbursement to providers. Federal officials, regardless of political affiliation, historically have sought to improve their understanding of the flow of Medicaid funding. Incoming officials could prioritize this issue again, which would have a varied effect on health plans and providers.
Medicare Priorities:
Relative to Marketplace and Medicaid, first term Trump Medicare policies were advanced with less conflict. Notable policy initiatives included a focus on healthcare-related challenges in , improving , and reducing —all of which were also cross-cutting issues that encompassed policy work beyond Medicare and could continue to be central to the next Medicare policy agenda.
Key considerations for healthcare stakeholders regarding Medicare policy are as follows:
- The president-elect’s first term to Medicare Advantage (MA) plans sought to maximize enrollment in MA and encourage . It’s reasonable to expect second term CMS officials to maintain an overall favorable approach to MA too. Incoming officials could narrow their scrutiny of MA plans to bipartisan concerns, for example MA plans’ prior authorization policies.
- While improving outcomes for dually eligibles beneficiaries generally is a bipartisan issue, state agencies, MA and Medicaid managed care plans, and other interested stakeholders should monitor the incoming Administration’s policy agenda for dually enrolled beneficiaries in Medicare and Medicaid. During the Biden Administration, CMS issued for Medicare Advantage Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs) to improve integration for the Medicare-Medicaid dually eligible population., Incoming Trump officials could revisit the approach, including the breadth of requirements and compliance timelines.
- During his first term, President Trump was highly engaged in elevating concerns about and HHS and CMS announced models and policies to for patients. In his second term, however, the President could seek to rein in certain aspects of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), while revisiting some of his prior proposals.
What to Watch
The incoming Administration and its transition team are moving expeditiously to nominate new Cabinet Secretaries and to identify key staffers. The individuals appointed to departmental, agency, and advisory leadership positions will have significant leeway in shaping the federal and state healthcare policy landscapes – determining which existing policies to review and potentially revise, new policies to develop, and the approach to working with state and local officials and stakeholders. This includes the Secretary of Health and Human Services, CMS Administrator, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration Commissioner, and Director of the National Institutes of Health, all of which require Senate confirmation. Additionally, healthcare stakeholders should continue to monitor the leadership races for the House and Senate and the primary congressional committees with jurisdiction over healthcare programs. These leaders will be key to a second term Trump legislative policy agenda.
Connect with Us
This article focuses in on a subset of issues within Marketplace, Medicaid, and Medicare and in the overall healthcare sector. Our features our experts discussing these and other insights on the election results. They provided an overview of what to expect from Congress and the Administration, focusing on key legislative priorities and executive actions.
Join us for our next two webinars in the series exploring the election results:
November 13, 2024
Health Policy Priorities on the Table: Understanding the Post-Election Landscape for Marketplace, Medicaid, and Medicare Programs