红领巾瓜报

Insights

红领巾瓜报 Insights: Your source for healthcare news, ideas and analysis.

红领巾瓜报 Insights 鈥 including our new podcast 鈥 puts the vast depth of 红领巾瓜报鈥檚 expertise at your fingertips, helping you stay informed about the latest healthcare trends and topics. Below, you can easily search based on your topic of interest to find useful information from our podcast, blogs, webinars, case studies, reports and more.

Show All | Podcast | Blogs | Webinars | Weekly Roundup | Videos | Case Studies | Reports | Spotlight

Filter by topic:

Receive timely expert insights on topics you care about.

Select Topics

1264 Results found.

Outlook 2026: A Conversation on Medicare Draft Payment Rules

Read Blog

As the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)听advances through the 2027 Medicare payment rule cycle, stakeholders across Medicare Advantage (MA) and the provider community are assessing how proposed changes could affect payment, utilization, and longer-term revenue. To better understand what to watch as draft rules move toward finalization,听Jen Colamonico, Vice President, Strategy and Communications at 红领巾瓜报 (红领巾瓜报), caught up with Senior Consulting Actuary with Wakley, an 红领巾瓜报 Company. Of particular interest was CMS鈥檚 decision to eliminate the Inpatient Only List (IPO) over a three- year period.

Q: As CMS begins releasing draft payment rules for 2027, what stands out most to you from a budgetary perspective?
Rachel: Timing and uncertainty really stand out. These policies don鈥檛 operate in isolation. Changes to Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) payment ultimately affect Medicare Advantage benchmarks, provider contracting, and long-term revenue expectations. Because bids, budgets, and contracts are set before rules are finalized, modeling different scenarios becomes essential. 

Q: One issue that has garnered significant interest is CMS鈥檚 decision to phase out Medicare鈥檚 Inpatient Only (IPO) policy, which is a list of procedures and services that must be provided on an inpatient basis. In 2026, CMS eliminated nearly 300 services, mostly musculoskeletal services, from the IPO list. How are Medicare Advantage plans thinking about the Inpatient Only list specifically? 

Rachel: Historically, many MA plans have followed the IPO policy even though they weren鈥檛 required to do so, largely because it simplified operations and aligned with Medicare fee-for-service payment systems. Plans do have flexibility in how they contract with providers, and we see a wide range of approaches in the market. Some contracts closely mirror FFS, while others incorporate more customized arrangements or risk sharing. Because of that, the direct impact of IPO changes will vary significantly across plans and provider relationships. 

Q: Where do you see the biggest potential impact for Medicare Advantage?
Rachel: I think the bigger impact may be indirect rather than tied to individual contract changes. Medicare Advantage benchmarks are driven by underlying fee-for-service spending trends. If CMS anticipates lower overall inpatient spending as procedures move to outpatient or ambulatory surgical center settings, that expectation could show up in benchmark growth rates. Even relatively small changes in benchmark growth can affect plan revenue, rebates, and benefit flexibility. 

Q: Are you already seeing signs of that in the data?
Rachel: We do see lower inpatient trends reflected in the 2027 and 2028 US per capita cost projections. It鈥檚 still unclear what鈥檚 driving those trends鈥攚hether its assumptions related to the IPO list removal or other factors. We鈥檝e asked CMS for more clarity. From an actuarial standpoint, understanding what鈥檚 baked into those projections is critical, because so many MA financial decisions flow from them. 

Q: How does this uncertainty affect provider planning, especially for hospitals?
Rachel: Providers are understandably concerned about potential revenue shifts if cases move out of the inpatient setting. But in Medicare Advantage, the picture is more nuanced than in fee-for-service. Many MA arrangements include risk sharing, medical loss ratio targets, and quality incentive payments. If overall costs decline, providers may share in savings through those mechanisms. So, while there may be pressure on inpatient revenue, it鈥檚 not necessarily a one directional loss. 

Q: Does that mean the overall impact may be less dramatic than it appears?
Rachel: Potentially, yes鈥攅specially for organizations already participating in value-based arrangements. A reduction in unit costs doesn’t automatically mean a reduction in total provider revenue in MA. The redistribution of dollars through shared savings and quality bonuses can offset some of that pressure. That鈥檚 why understanding contract structure is just as important as understanding the policy itself. 

Q: What about quality and patient safety as procedures move to lower cost settings?
Rachel: Quality is always central in Medicare Advantage, and plans are already managing a lot of complexity related to Star ratings and quality measurement. We haven鈥檛 yet seen specific quality safeguards tied to the IPO list changes, but I would expect more discussion in the forthcoming proposed rules. From the MA side, contracting remains a key lever. Plans still have flexibility to ensure procedures are performed in appropriate settings and to align incentives with quality outcomes. 

Q: What steps do you recommend to stakeholders to prepare for the final rule and for 2027?
Rachel: Modeling helps organizations understand the range of possible outcomes rather than betting on a single assumption. We鈥檙e looking at different utilization scenarios, site of care shifts, and benchmark growth trajectories. For providers, modeling can inform contract negotiations and capital planning. For plans, it helps assess revenue risk and benefit design flexibility. It doesn鈥檛 eliminate uncertainty, but it helps organizations make informed decisions. 

Q: If you could change one thing about how these policies are rolled out, what would it be?
Rachel: Transparency. The more clarity CMS can provide around cost projections and assumptions鈥攅specially those affecting benchmarks鈥攖he better positioned actuaries, plans, and providers will be to respond. So much of Medicare Advantage pricing relies on understanding how fee-for-service is expected to evolve. Greater transparency helps everyone plan more responsibly. 

红领巾瓜报鈥檚 Medicare Practice Group Can Help 

As CMS moves closer to finalizing the 2027 payment rules, actuarial modeling will continue to be an important tool for translating policy direction into financial strategy. For MA plans and providers alike, early analysis and scenario planning can help mitigate risk and identify opportunity as Medicare鈥檚 payment landscape continues to evolve. 

For additional insights, listen to Rachel Stewart and Zach Gaumer on 红领巾瓜报鈥檚 Vital Viewpoints podcast. Learn more about our Medicare services and solutions. 

Early Signals from a Pivotal ACA Enrollment Year

Read Blog

On April 15, 2026, Wakely Consulting Group, an 红领巾瓜报 company, published 鈥,鈥 the first comprehensive nationwide look at 2026 enrollment trends in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) market. While the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has released 2026 plan selection , the Wakely report addresses who retained coverage and who did not, what we still don鈥檛 know, and what we should be watching for throughout the rest of the 2026 plan year.

This article highlights key findings in the report, related state-level data, impacts and takeaways, and actions states and other interest-holders should consider as they look to mitigate further coverage losses and address market stability in& plan year 2027 and beyond.

Key Findings from the ACA Marketplace Early Enrollment Trends Report 

The report is based on analysis of data from the Wakely National Risk Adjustment Reporting (WNRAR) project, which includes summary data from participating ACA-compliant individual market plans. WNRAR includes data from over 75 issuers representing nearly 80 percent of enrollment the individual market. Key national findings in the report include:

  • Only 86% of enrollees paid their January 2026 premium.听
  • State variation is significant, ranging from as low as鈥63%鈥痯aid鈥痠n January to as high as鈥99%.听
  • The overall听average听enrollment鈥痙ecrease鈥痠s鈥痚stimated听to be between听17% and听26%鈥痩ower than 2025,听with morbidity projected to worsen听by听2.9鈥6.5%.听

The report highlights shifts in plan choice activity driven by affordability pressures, which resulted in considerable migration away from richer benefit plans to plans with lower premiums and higher out-of-pocket maximums. Examples include:

  • Silver plan enrollment fell听approximately听17% from 2025.听
  • Bronze enrollment increased by more than 10%.听
  • More than听13% of听2025听Gold plan enrollees听selected a lower听priced,听Bronze听tier plan听in 2026.听

The report also demonstrated the importance and value of outreach, operational excellence, and state-level affordability mitigation strategies. Examples include: 

  • Enrollment decreases are lower in听states with听state-based marketplaces听(SBMs)听and expected to stay lower than Healthcare.gov states, largely听because of听proactive outreach and marketing initiatives,听lower net premium increases,听and state听affordability听programs.听
  • States with premium alignment and silver-loading as a policy lever for improving gold plan affordability are seeing results. Gold plan enrollment increased by 10 percentage points in states where gold plans cost less than silver plans, whereas gold enrollment did not materially change in states where silver plans cost less. For states, this provides a lever to assist consumers seeking to shift into plans with lower cost-sharing without increasing premiums.

State-Reported Early Enrollment Results 

Many states warned of coverage losses as a result of changing federal policies and the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits (ePTCs). State-specific reporting for 2026 validates the findings in the Wakely report. The recently released state-level data from SBMs affirms that the drop-off in enrollment through cancellations and dis-enrollments is significant. It also illustrates that state efforts to mitigate and address affordability gaps have worked to some extent but have not been enough on their own to head off coverage losses in 2026. Examples are as follows: 

  • In听骋别辞谤驳颈补鈥攖he听only SBM without Medicaid expansion鈥攅nrollment听听27% from an estimated听1.3听million in听April听2025 to approximately听950,000听in听April 2026.听
  • 滨苍听狈别飞听闯别谤蝉别测鈥攁听state听with state-funded premium subsidies,听a reinsurance program, and a mandate听that听residents have health听insurance鈥攅nrollment has听听by more than 11%听since听April 2025.听
  • 滨苍听California鈥攁nother state with premium subsidies,听facilitated听enrollment,听and an individual mandate鈥攅ffectuated听enrollment听听by 7%听from February 2025 to February 2026.听
  • Overall, SBMs are听听that coverage drops听were听24% higher from January to March 2026 than听during听the same period in 2025 and that听the rate of plan shifting from Silver to Bronze听increased听significantly,听quadrupling听in six states.听

Downstream Impact on Healthcare Access and Uncompensated Care 

While not yet apparent in the early enrollment data, the downstream impact of 1) coverage losses, 2) increased enrollment in plans with higher cost-sharing, and 3) a worsening risk pool on the health of consumers, as well as the healthcare system, will be significant. Consumers may decide to postpone or forgo necessary care, which could lead to avoidable and more costly healthcare conditions. Increases in the number of people who uninsured and underinsured will have a direct and negative economic impact on provider finances, which are already strained, and uncompensated care and demands on patient assistance programs will increase accordingly. 

Looking Ahead 

The individual market will continue to evolve and change in the coming years as a result of future regulatory and operational changes. A shortened Open Enrollment Period, increased Medicaid redetermination requirements, and new pre-enrollment verification requirements are notable initiatives that are expected to roll out in the coming years.

Healthcare organizations and government agencies should consider the effect of these changes, including further coverage losses and instability in the individual market driven by the administrative complexity of these changes.

In addition, there are potential federal changes such as expanded availability of catastrophic plans, the introduction of non-network plans, and additional eligibility changes, which could put further strain on ACA Marketplace operations and the individual market.

Getting ahead of these changes will be critical to mitigating coverage losses and ensuring the long-term stability and viability of the individual market. In a federal policy environment that has largely deferred acting on ACA affordability, we expect policymakers, issuers, and other interest-holders to increasingly look to governors and state legislatures for decisive action. State subsidy and reinsurance programs are established affordability mechanisms that can provide consumers with affordability relief quickly, assuming state funding is available.

These investments can pay off for consumers from an economic perspective as well. For every additional dollar spent on state subsidies or reinsurance to maintain or increase coverage, states can expect to see reductions in uncompensated care, less reliance on patient assistance programs, and decreases in the number of consumers who forgo or delay care. In addition, investments in enrollment operations and assistance, outreach, and education will be critical to ensuring consumers are aware of the changes ahead and the actions they need to take to access and stay covered.

Connect with Us 

红领巾瓜报, Inc. (红领巾瓜报), and Wakely colleagues are closely tracking federal policy activity and state actions to address these challenges. Our experts support states, issuers, consumer groups, and other interest-holders to achieve success in the operation of and participation in the marketplaces. Our team has broad historical knowledge of the challenges and opportunities in this market and can support every step of the planning and execution processes to improve affordability and stability as it evolves in the coming months and years. 

Contact听our experts below with questions about the report and听to discuss opportunities to address the trends and forthcoming changes in the market.听

To read more about the changes ahead, see the following reports: 

ACA Enrollment Declines: Implications and Options for State and Federal Policymakers

Register Now

Recent and future policy changes are reshaping the ACA market. A recent Wakely report finds that only 86% of ACA enrollees nationwide paid their first premium at the start of the year, raising important questions about affordability, access, and market stability. Additionally, the 2027 Notice of Benefits and Payment Parameters (NBPP) is expected to be finalized this Spring which will have additional implications for consumers, issuers, and other stakeholders. As policymakers and state leaders consider how to respond to the shifting market composition and future policy changes, this discussion will focus on the policy implications of these shifts and the options to address affordability and coverage options to improve market stability.

Join 红领巾瓜报鈥檚 ACA team for a policy-focused conversation on what these projected changes mean for marketplace dynamics, including impacts to risk pools, premiums, and issuer participation. The session will explore emerging federal and state policy responses and offer insight into how today鈥檚 decisions may shape 2027 rates, plan offerings, and long-term market sustainability.

Learning Objectives:

  • Analyze policy drivers: Examine how changes to federal subsidy policy are influencing ACA marketplace enrollment, affordability, and coverage continuity.
  • Evaluate policy tradeoffs: Assess how enrollment declines impact market stability, including risk pools, premiums, and issuer participation.
  • Inform policy strategy: Identify state and federal policy options to mitigate coverage losses and support a stable, competitive marketplace heading into 2027.

CMS Proposes Modest Hospital Payment Updates and Signals Expanded Use of Mandatory Value-Based Models

Read Blog

On April 10, 2026, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the proposed rule for the . The proposal combines a modest net increase in hospital payments with policy signals around quality reporting and mandatory episode-based payment models鈥攎ost notably a proposed nationwide expansion of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model. 

These proposed updates underscore CMS鈥檚 continued emphasis on value-based purchasing, episode accountability, and alignment across quality programs. In addition, CMS resurfaces ongoing debates with hospital stakeholders about the adequacy of Medicare payment updates amid rising costs and coverage disruptions. 

This article reviews several key provisions in the FY 2027 proposed rule. 

Hospital Payment Updates: Headline Increase Masks Net Impact 

Under the proposed rule, CMS would increase base IPPS and LTCH PPS payment rates by 2.4 percent in FY 2027. However, after accounting for proposed reductions to uncompensated care payments for disproportionate share hospitals (DSH) and changes in outlier payments for extraordinarily high-cost cases, CMS estimates the effective payment increase would be closer to 1.2 percent. 

In aggregate, CMS projects the proposed update would translate to approximately $1.4 billion in additional payments to acute care hospitals next year. Hospital industry groups鈥攊ncluding the American Hospital Association (AHA) and the Federation of American Hospitals (FAH)鈥攈ave pushed back, arguing that the proposed update does not sufficiently reflect medical inflation, workforce pressures, or anticipated growth in the uninsured population. 

These concerns reflect a long-standing dynamic in annual hospital payment rules: CMS seeking to balance statutory updates and budget neutrality constraints against the hospital industry鈥檚 concern that Medicare payments are lagging behind underlying costs. 

Quality Reporting and Program Alignment 

The proposed rule would also make notable updates to the Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting (IQR) Program. CMS proposes adding three new quality measures to be phased in during 2029 and 2030, while modifying eight existing measures to include Medicare Advantage patients. CMS also proposes shortening the performance period for certain measures from three years to two鈥攁 change designed to accelerate feedback and better align measures across programs. 

These changes continue CMS鈥檚 broader effort to harmonize quality measurement across Medicare payment and value-based programs, reduce reporting lag, and incorporate a more comprehensive view of patient populations. 

Updates to Mandatory TEAM Model 

CMS also proposes several updates to the Transforming Episode Accountability Model (TEAM), the mandatory episode-based payment model finalized last year. Key proposals include: 

  • Expanding the list of听MS-DRGs听included in the spinal fusion episode听
  • Aligning TEAM quality measurement performance periods with the IQR Program听
  • Making targeted technical refinements to payment听methodology听

In addition, CMS is seeking stakeholder feedback on whether ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) should participate in TEAM and whether participation should be voluntary for physician-owned hospitals, signaling potential future expansion or recalibration of the model. 

Proposed Expansion of Joint Replacement Bundles 

CMS proposes to expand the existing Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Expanded (CJR-X) Model nationwide beginning October 1, 2027. The agency also plans to make participation mandatory for most IPPS hospitals. 

CMS tested the original CJR model in 34 metropolitan areas between 2016 and 2024, generating improved patient outcomes and net Medicare savings, according to agency evaluations. CJR-X would become the fifth Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation model to meet the statutory criteria for nationwide expansion. 

Under CJR-X, hospitals performing lower extremity joint replacements would be accountable for the cost and quality of care for the initial procedure and most related spending during the subsequent 90 days. Although the overall structure mirrors the original CJR model, CMS proposes several important updates: 

  • Expansion of episodes to include ankle replacements, in addition to hip and knee procedures听
  • Adoption of a more robust risk adjustment听methodology听with significantly more variables, aligning closely with the TEAM model听
  • Introduction of a 5 percent stop-loss policy for hospitals听that听serve听higher proportions of dually eligible beneficiaries and certain smaller hospitals听

Participation would be mandatory for most IPPS hospitals, with exceptions for hospitals already participating in TEAM, which includes a lower extremity joint replacement episode; Maryland hospitals operating under global budgets; and hospitals not paid under both IPPS and the Outpatient Prospective Payment System, such as Critical Access Hospitals. 

Why It Matters 

The 2027 IPPS and LTCH PPS proposed rule reinforces several clear policy signals: 

  • Pressure on hospital margins is likely to persist, as payment updates continue to trail hospital-reported cost growth.听
  • Mandatory episode-based models听remain听central to CMS鈥檚听value-based strategy, with CJR-X听representing听a significant escalation in scope and scale.听
  • Program alignment and MA inclusion are accelerating, with implications for hospital data systems, care coordination strategies, and reporting infrastructure.听

Hospitals and health systems will need to assess not only the near-term financial impact of the proposed payment updates, but also their readiness to accept expanded episode accountability and meet evolving quality measurement requirements. 

Comments on the proposed rule will shape final decisions regarding payment levels, quality program changes, and the scope of mandatory participation in CJR-X. Stakeholders will be watching closely to see whether CMS moderates its approach to mandatory models or doubles down on episode-based accountability as a cornerstone of Medicare payment reform. 

In parallel, CMS has released several other proposed payment rules this month, including those that would affect skilled nursing facilities, hospice providers, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and inpatient psychiatric facilities. For these entities, CMS generally proposes payment updates of approximately 2.4 percent and 2.3 percent for inpatient psychiatric facilities. As part of its broader program integrity focus, CMS also has proposed new transparency measures for hospice providers; this follows recent enforcement actions related to fraudulent enrollment. 

Connect with Us 

红领巾瓜报, Inc. (红领巾瓜报), monitors federal regulatory and legislative developments in the inpatient setting and assesses the impact on hospitals, life science companies, and other stakeholders. Our experts interpret and model hospital payment policies and assist clients in developing CMS comment letters and long-term strategic plans. Our team replicates CMS payment methodologies and model alternative policies using the most recent Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage (100%) claims data. We also support clients with DRG reassignment requests, New Technology Add-on Payment (NTAP) applications, and analyses of Innovation Center alternative payment models. 

For more information about the proposed policies, contact one of our Medicare experts

Medicaid Managed Care Enrollment: Q4 2025 Trends and Early Signals Ahead of New Eligibility Policies

Read Blog

This week 红领巾瓜报 (红领巾瓜报), draws on its database of monthly Medicaid managed care enrollment to present its latest quarterly analysis, offering a snapshot of enrollment trends across 37 states. 

The analysis comes at a critical time. As states prepare for Medicaid eligibility policy changes that take effect in 2027鈥攊ncluding more frequent eligibility determinations and expanded work and community engagement requirements鈥攃urrent enrollment trends provide an early signal of how policy decisions and administrative practices are already influencing coverage levels. 

The 红领巾瓜报 Information Services (红领巾瓜报IS) analysis shows that Medicaid managed care accounted for 85.6 percent of total Medicaid enrollment in December 2025. This analysis, available to 红领巾瓜报IS subscribers, uses data from nearly 300 health plans in 41 states.鈥疶he report provides by-plan enrollment plus corporate ownership, program inclusion, and for-profit versus not-for-profit status, with breakout tabs for publicly traded plans. 

Key Insights from Q4 2025 Data 

The 37 states included in this review have released monthly Medicaid managed care enrollment data through public websites or in response to a public records request from 红领巾瓜报. The report includes the most recent data obtained and illustrates the effect of state-level choices around eligibility and administration. Key findings include: 

  • As of听December听2025,听Medicaid managed care enrollment across the 37 states declined by听2.2 million members听year over year, falling to 62.5 million鈥攁听3.4 percent decrease.听
  • Of the 37 states,听eight鈥擟olorado, Delaware, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, and Oregon鈥攄id听not听experience year-over-year听managed care enrollment听declines,听and听instead showed听flat enrollment or modest gains.听With the exception of Mississippi, these听are听all听Medicaid expansion states.听
  • Arizona听and Indiana听experienced听double-digit听percentage听declines. Notably,听Indiana began requiring听enrollees听to actively respond to renewal mailers,听which aligns with听enrollment declines that began in March 2025.听
  • Among the听expansion states in the analysis,听enrollment听declined听by听1.7听million (-3.3%) to听50.8听million.听The听seven non-expansion states听experienced听a听similar听decline (-3.6%),听bringing听enrollment to听11.7听million enrollees.听

Data Considerations. The data have some important limitations. States report enrollment figures at different points during the month, with some data reflecting beginning of the month totals and others capturing end of the month enrollment. In addition, some state datasets encompass all Medicaid programs offering managed care plans, whereas others reflect only a subset of the managed Medicaid population. As a result, the findings should be viewed as indicative of broader trends rather than a comprehensive state-by-state comparison.鈥&苍产蝉辫;

Market Share and Plan Dynamics 

Using our data repository for 300 health plans across 41 states, 红领巾瓜报IS analyzes corporate ownership, program participation, and tax status among Medicaid managed care plans. As of December 2025, Centene maintained the largest share of the national Medicaid managed care market at 17.8 percent, followed by Elevance (10.4%), United (8.5%), and Molina (6.0%) (see Figure 1).鈥疶hese figures highlight continued concentration among large national plans, even as overall enrollment declines. 

Figure 1. National Medicaid Managed Care Market Share by Number of Beneficiaries for a Sample of Publicly Traded Plans, December 2025 

What to Watch鈥 

Enrollment trends observed in the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2025 and continuing into 2026 indicate increasing state attention to eligibility policy and program integrity. State legislative activity, budget pressures, and federal regulatory developments are prompting many states to assess and strengthen certain aspects of their programs related to eligibility, particularly as they prepare to implement redetermination and work and community engagement requirements. 

Several states are already moving toward implementation. Nebraska is scheduled to launch Medicaid work requirements on May 1,听2026,听while Montana plans to begin implementation on July 1, 2026. With听additional听federal guidance still听emerging, most other states are working toward compliance ahead of January 2027 deadlines.听滨苍听expansion听states,听policymakers听retain听authority to tighten administrative processes, alter optional benefits, or adjust provider payment levels鈥攁ctions that听may听materially affect enrollment.听

These developments underscore why Medicaid managed care enrollment trends deserve close attention. Declines in enrollment are often an early indicator of broader system impacts, including rising uncompensated care for providers, shifts in payer mix, and increased financial pressure on safety鈥憂et systems. For managed care organizations, even modest enrollment changes can mask more significant shifts in risk profiles, geographic concentration, or service needs. 

Connect with Us鈥 

红领巾瓜报 is home to experts who know the Medicaid managed care landscape听and how it is evolving. 红领巾瓜报IS鈥檚听Medicaid听enrollment data, financials,听procurement听tracking, and a robust library of public documents鈥痚quips stakeholders with听timely, actionable intelligence.听

For more information about the 红领巾瓜报IS subscription, contact鈥Andrea Maresca鈥痑苍诲鈥Alona Nenko.鈥&苍产蝉辫;

红领巾瓜报 Resource Provides Key Insights about the Evolving Medicare-Medicaid Integration Landscape

Read Blog

People who are dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid remain a central focus for policymakers and healthcare organizations, given their complex care needs, disproportionate share of spending, and the long-standing challenge of coordinating coverage across two programs. One of the primary vehicles for advancing integration has been Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs), which continue to play an increasingly prominent role as federal and state policymakers encourage tighter Medicare-Medicaid alignment.

As states play a more active role in shaping enrollment rules, Medicaid contracting, and procurement strategies, the duals market is becoming more structured and more explicitly guided by state policy decisions. 红领巾瓜报 (红领巾瓜报鈥檚) 2026 Duals Integration Environmental Inventory, examines how this shift shapes the integration landscape in 2026. This comprehensive inventory is based on a review of the 2026 market, insights from states, and other publicly available resources.

This article examines key trends from 贬惭础鈥檚&苍产蝉辫;2026 inventory and addresses federal policy changes scheduled to take effect for 2027, which contribute to this dynamic environment.

What to Expect in 2026

As the landscape for duals integration evolves, the central question has shifted from whether D-SNPs operate in a state to the more consequential question of how states are using Medicaid policy levers (i.e., enrollment rules, procurement, contracting, and managed care structures) to drive tighter alignment between Medicare and Medicaid. 

At the federal level, recent Medicare Advantage and Part D rulemaking is reinforcing that movement. The  finalized the second phase-down of the D-SNP look-alike threshold to 60 percent for 2026 and established 2027 rules that limit enrollment in certain D-SNPs to members of an affiliated Medicaid managed care organization. The rule also limits the number of D-SNP benefit packages that can be offered alongside an affiliated Medicaid managed care organization. More recently, the  requires certain D-SNPs to use integrated member ID cards and integrated health risk assessments beginning in 2027. 

Together these rules signal a continued federal emphasis on linking D-SNP enrollment and operations more closely to Medicaid coverage and delivery systems, with states playing a greater role in determining how alignment is achieved. 

What the 2026 Inventory Shows

红领巾瓜报鈥檚 2026 Duals Integration Environmental Inventory shows how these policy signals are translating into state action. More specifically: 

  • Statewide exclusively aligned enrollment appears in 16 states in the 2026 inventory, up from听nine听in 2025.听
  • Applicable Integrated Plans (AIPs) are present in 22 states, up from 14, and default enrollment is in place in 21 states, up from 16.听
  • The inventory also captures 6,084,997 total D-SNP enrollees, including 1,975,250 in听Highly Integrated听SNPs听(HIDE)听and 743,683 in听Fully Integrated SNPs (FIDE-SNPs).听

Those changes are already visible in state markets: 

  • Illinois, Massachusetts, Ohio, and Rhode Island entered听2026 with a greater FIDE-SNP presence tied to legacy Medicare-Medicaid Plan transitions.听
  • Michigan听launched听MI Coordinated Health as a HIDE-SNP in selected regions in 2026, with statewide expansion planned for 2027.听
  • Delaware also stands out:听Although it already had AIPs in the 2025 inventory, it adds statewide exclusively aligned enrollment in 2026 and shows both HIDE-SNPs and coordination-only D-SNPs.听

A Resource to Track State Market Direction

贬惭础鈥檚&苍产蝉辫;, available to 红领巾瓜报 Information Services (红领巾瓜报IS) subscribers, includes a state-by-state view of the Medicaid policy, contracting, and program structures shaping duals integration and D-SNP markets. In addition to enrollment trends, the inventory documents the integration model each state is pursuing, whether long-term services and supports or behavioral health are included in managed care, and how procurement and contract decisions may inform future market activity. 

红领巾瓜报 experts work with clients to apply this information and deepen their understanding of state integration approaches, inform assessments of their market readiness and alignment opportunities, and develop strategies that support more effective Medicare-Medicaid integration. 

Looking Ahead

Notably, 红领巾瓜报鈥檚 inventory reflects a point in time understanding of where an individual state is today and what is known at this time about their next steps and plans. However, we expect changes in many states as they seek guidance from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the D-SNP community to implement required changes and adopt new regulatory provisions that support state goals and priorities. 

The 2026 inventory suggests that more states are using formal alignment tools, that more enrollment is concentrated in integrated products, and that more markets are being shaped by the interaction between Medicaid structure, procurement, and D-SNP strategy. 

Connect with Us 

For organizations seeking to understand where the market is headed, the Duals Integration Inventory offers a clear view of how state policy and market structure are evolving and where tighter Medicare-Medicaid alignment is taking hold. 

Contact Holly Michaels Fisher and Julie Faulhaber to discuss your organization鈥檚 questions and needs regarding an integration strategy and market analysis. For information about the 红领巾瓜报IS subscription, access to the Duals Environmental Inventory contact Andrea Maresca and Gabby Palmieri

Connected Crisis Care: Generating Collaborative Solutions for 988 and Beyond

Read More

红领巾瓜报 Solutions

Connected Crisis Care: Generating Collaborative Solutions for 988 and Beyond

红领巾瓜报, Inc. (红领巾瓜报), is a national leader in crisis system design, known for developing innovative, collaborative, data-driven solutions that help states and communities build effective, person-centered crisis response systems. We help strengthen crisis response systems through skill-building and collaboration strategies. Our model creates lasting crisis response system connections, fosters trust, and enhances the overall quality of care across the crisis response continuum.

Is your state, region, or county ready to enhance and sustain its crisis response?

Has your state recently launched 988, mobile crisis teams, or crisis stabilization units and is now exploring next steps to strengthen the system? 

Are you seeking practical, engaging training, and convening strategies to deepen collaboration and elevate your crisis response across all partners? 

Our Approach:

Coordinated Crisis Response Through Skill-Building and System Integration

Our team uses a two-prong approach to bring together a diverse group of providers, partners, and stakeholders to expand system capacity and build trust and collaboration across the crisis response continuum. Through a series of cross-system trainings and convenings, we lay the foundation for better communication, coordination, and collaboration. This approach ensures that individuals in crisis experience more seamless, coordinated, and compassionate care across every point of the response continuum.

Skill-Building:

Monthly Training Programs Tailored to Every Role in Crisis Response

"This training helped cross-train coping strategies for working with clients, reminded us that there is always a path through stress, and helped us focus on meeting individuals where they are in their journey." -Crisis care provider

We collaborate with our clients to determine the best approach for training that meets the needs of your organization. Our monthly virtual training courses are designed to meet crisis response providers where they are鈥攁cross all levels of readiness and roles. Using diverse learning methods, such as didactic instruction, interactive problem-solving, and peer-to-peer collaboration, we ensure content is practical, engaging, accessible and grounded in best practice frameworks and protocols. Topics include culturally responsive mobile crisis response, trauma-informed care, suicide risk assessments, and working with diverse populations including youth, older adults, and individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities. Each session builds real-world skills that can be applied immediately in the field. In addition, these courses can be set up to be taken on demand.

System Integration:

Systemwide Convenings to Build Trust and Drive Collaboration

"I appreciate having a variety of divisions and departments (i.e., HR) participating in these monthly convenings. Thank you for this opportunity and collaboration." - Crisis convening attendee

Through structured, facilitated convenings, led by 红领巾瓜报鈥檚 crisis response experts, we bring together a diverse network of crisis providers, partners, and stakeholders to strengthen coordination across the full crisis continuum. We use Liberating Structures and other learning techniques to enhance engagement, foster relational trust, share knowledge, and sustain collaboration. Convening topics can be aligned with the monthly training topics to reinforce learning and provide opportunities to operationalize new skills and understanding across the crisis continuum. Convenings often highlight local exemplars as a way to share local best practices and encourage locality-specific collaboration and problem-solving.

Ready to Build Trust and Capacity in Your Crisis System?

We are excited to partner with your crisis care system to help you create a transformative response model based on collaboration, trust, and ongoing professional development. In addition to this suite of offerings, the 红领巾瓜报 team has expertise in helping communities develop and implement strategic roadmaps for next-phase crisis system improvement.

Who We Help

911/call centers/emergency management services (EMS)

Associations and foundations

Behavioral health care providers

Coalitions and advocates

Criminal justice stakeholders and facilities

Crisis care systems and providers

Educational settings and academic institutions

Federal, state, and local government agencies

Health plans

Hospitals and health systems

Investors

Law enforcement

Public health departments

Project Spotlight:

What Makes 红领巾瓜报 Different?

Many of our team members are former executives and clinical leaders from the behavioral health sector. They bring decades of experience in leading behavioral health care in inpatient, outpatient and emergency department settings, and have been instrumental in establishing the 988 program. 红领巾瓜报 provides the depth, agility, and collaborative approach to address today鈥檚 most urgent behavioral health challenges. We know the challenges faced by states and organizations, and support strategic planning and implementation, large scale crisis system redesigns, crisis needs assessments, and relationship building with stakeholders.

Contact our experts:

Headshot of Angela Bergefurd

Angela Bergefurd

Senior Principal

A seasoned behavioral health leader with more than 25 years of government healthcare experience, Angela Bergefurd has a deep understanding … Read more
Headshot of Allie Franklin

Allie Franklin

Managing Director

Allie Franklin is a licensed clinical social worker with decades of experience in public, private, and non-profit behavioral health, healthcare, … Read more
Headshot of Jennifer Hodgson

Jennifer Hodgson

Principal

Jennifer Hodgson is a licensed marriage and family therapist who maintained a private practice and taught in higher education for … Read more
Headshot of Monica Johnson

Monica Johnson

Managing Director

A skilled state and federal government executive, Monica Johnson has over 25 years of experience in the behavioral health field. … Read more
Headshot of Kim Williams

Kim Williams

Principal

Kim Williams is an experienced executive, policy leader and social worker with a record of transformational growth, accomplishment, and innovation … Read more

April 22, 2026

红领巾瓜报 Resource Provides Key Insights about the Evolving Medicare-Medicaid Integration Landscape

Read Roundup

Medicare鈥檚 “Inpatient Only” Rule Is Going Away. Now What?

Listen Now

This episode of Vital Viewpoints on Healthcare explores how evolving Medicare payment policy is reshaping where and how care is delivered. The discussion covers the phase-out of the inpatient only list and the operational and financial challenges tied to shifting procedures into outpatient settings. Zach Gaumer, regional director at 红领巾瓜报, shares his perspective on the policy mechanics, provider behavior, and market signals emerging from CMS rulemaking; while Rachel Stewart, senior consulting actuary at Wakely (an 红领巾瓜报 Company), explains how plans are modeling uncertainty, navigating contract dynamics, and assessing the downstream impact on costs and quality across the healthcare system.

CMS鈥檚 LEAD Model: A New Phase for Accountable Care and Application Considerations

Read Blog

The听听represents the next major step in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)听听strategy and reinforces a federal commitment to value-based participation in Traditional Medicare. Announced as the successor to听, LEAD is a voluntary, nationwide, 10鈥憏ear model that will operate from 2027 to 2036, making it the longest-running accountable care organization (ACO) model the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation has tested.

Momentum around the LEAD ACO model has accelerated since CMS鈥檚 recent release of the  (RFA), which formally moves LEAD from policy design to implementation. The RFA requires prospective participants to evaluate program design choices, financial implications, and operational readiness on a compressed timeline. Notably, CMS has indicated that additional opportunities to express interest will follow for organizations that are not prepared to apply for participation in the initial cohort.

This article explains key design elements of the LEAD model and identifies considerations for organizations assessing whether and when to pursue participation in LEAD.

Core Design Evolutions of the LEAD Model

While LEAD builds on many of the elements from ACO REACH, its design reflects how the Innovation Center intends to address challenges with previous ACO models, such as the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). At its core, LEAD seeks to establish a pathway to long鈥憈erm engagement in value-based care that creates an attractive option for all types of providers, including ACOs with a history of engaging in value-based care and providers that have yet to meaningfully participate.

LEAD introduces a set of targeted design changes intended to improve predictability, alignment accuracy, and long鈥憈erm participation in accountable care鈥攎ost notably through revised benchmarking, updated beneficiary alignment, and expanded flexibility for engaging specialists and high鈥憂eeds populations.

1. Revising Benchmarking Policies to Support Predictability and Success

  • LEAD provides a major win for ACOs seeking long-term predictability bysetting a long-term benchmark that will not rebase for the entirety of the 10-year model. In MSSP, many ACOs eventually face the 鈥渞atchet effect鈥 in which benchmarks erode after rebasing to reflect the ACO鈥檚 more recent spending patterns. It can create a significant hurdle for ACOs that have already successfully reduced spending, as their own prior success lowers their benchmark. By not rebasing for the entirety of the model period, LEAD provides an attractive alternative to the MSSP, which rebases every five years.
  • LEAD will also support historically successful ACOs by transitioning to a fully regional rate book by the end of the model period. As a result, benchmarks will be set based on overall spending in the region where an ACO operates rather than an ACO鈥檚 historical spending. While ACO REACH also used a regional rate book to inform some ACO benchmarks, LEAD goes further by seeking to transition all ACOs to a benchmark based听fully听on a regional rate book while also adding protections for higher-spending ACOs by transitioning regions at different timelines to ensure that newer ACOs have the opportunity to implement the kinds of care delivery changes that lead to lower spending before they are subject to penalties.
  • Other notable changes to benchmarking include a variety of ACO-specific adjustments and the addition of an administrative component to benchmarking.听ACOs will be eligible to receive a boost to their benchmarks with either a regional efficiency adjustment for ACOs with lower spending or a prior savings adjustment for ACOs with a demonstrated history of achieving savings. LEAD also introduces an administratively set component to benchmarking鈥攖he Accountable Care Prospective Trend鈥攚hich already is used in the MSSP, though LEAD adds a new guardrail policy to promote predictability.

2. Improving Accuracy in Beneficiary Alignment

  • LEAD鈥檚 new 鈥渉ybrid鈥 alignment option increases accuracy and responsiveness.听Monthly additions of voluntarily aligned beneficiaries and mid-year recognition of new participant taxpayer identification numbers (TINs) adopted after the start of the performance year (PY) allow alignment to better reflect real-time care relationships, averting lag and operational friction.

3. Adding Support for High-Needs Beneficiaries

  • LEAD expands support for beneficiaries with complex needs through a universal High Needs category and recalibrated risk adjustment.听By moving away from ACO REACH鈥檚 population鈥慹xclusive model, LEAD lowers barriers for organizations that serve a disproportionate share of high鈥憂eeds and dually eligible populations. In addition, CMS will test Medicare鈥慚edicaid alignment in two states, and help states develop arrangements supporting the provision of value-based care between ACOs and state Medicaid agencies or managed care organizations.

4. Promoting Deeper Engagement with Specialists

  • LEAD increases flexibility for engaging specialists in value鈥慴ased arrangements.听New Non鈥慞rimary Care Capitation options and episode-based risk arrangements (CMS鈥慉dministered Risk Arrangements (CARAs)), allow ACOs to share risk with specialists without Total Care Capitation, reducing operational complexity while expanding accountability beyond primary care.

5. Advancing Technology Adoption and Innovation

  • LEAD introduces structured pathways to promote technology adoption.听Planned Artificial Intelligence (AI)鈥慽nferred risk adjustment will be phased in following successful testing and validation, while the Tech Enabler Initiative and Rapid Cycle Innovation Program seek to reduce administrative burden and accelerate evidence generation鈥攑articularly for smaller or resource鈥慶onstrained ACOs.
Next Steps

The Innovation Center is operating on an accelerated timeline for the initial LEAD cohort. Prospective ACOs have fewer than 50 days to digest a detailed  and model potential performance. Applications are due May 17, 2026. ACOs that participated in ACO REACH in PY 2026 will be well-positioned, as many of the provisions in LEAD will be familiar, and the agency is permitting this group of ACOs to submit an abbreviated application for participation.

For organizations not ready to apply for the first cohort, CMS will release a standardized Letter of Interest form by April 17, 2026, to gauge interest in future application rounds. In this context, organizations considering LEAD participation should be assessing not only near鈥憈erm application readiness, but also longer鈥憈erm strategic alignment with the model鈥檚 10鈥憏ear commitment, risk structure, and operational requirements. Key considerations include benchmarking predictability, readiness to manage regional benchmarks, capacity to engage specialists and high鈥憂eeds beneficiaries, technology capabilities, and alignment with broader value鈥慴ased care strategies across Medicare and Medicaid.

Connect with Us

红领巾瓜报 (红领巾瓜报), supports organizations across the LEAD decision continuum, including those pursuing immediate application and those preparing for future cohorts. 红领巾瓜报 can help organizations:

  • Interpret LEAD鈥檚 policy and financial design relative to existing ACO and MSSP participation
  • Model performance scenarios under alternative benchmark, alignment, and risk configurations
  • Assess operational readiness across care management, contracting, analytics, and compliance
  • Develop application strategies and supporting materials, including responses to the LEAD RFA
  • Choose to defer application on steps that preserve future optionality

As CMS advances LEAD under an ambitious timeline, early analysis and disciplined decision鈥憁aking will be critical for organizations seeking to align participation with their long鈥憈erm value鈥慴ased care strategies.

For questions contact Amy Bassano and Rebecca Nielsen.

Connecting the Dots: Medicaid Community Engagement Requirements and State Readiness for 2027

Read Blog

Our March 19, 2026, Connecting the Dots analysis described the federal requirements and the operational questions states and partners will need to answer to effectively implement Medicaid work and community engagement requirements. Since then, federal officials have advanced their forthcoming regulation to the final stage of review and intend to meet the statutory requirement to release interim final guidance by June 2026. In addition, many states have taken early steps to communicate upcoming changes and begin planning for system, policy, and partner readiness.

While state sessions are clearly grabbing a lot of energy, timing of pulling together many of the moving parts is becoming a concern as states undergo one of the most fundamental operational challenges to the Medicaid program since its inception. This article synthesizes emerging approaches and identifies practical opportunities to refine strategies and strengthen readiness while minimizing burden for enrollees and state Medicaid agencies.

Early Actions in States Preparing to Implement Work and Community Engagement Requirements

1. States Are Launching Websites that Highlight Coming Changes

As of April 2026, more than half of US states that are subject to the Medicaid work and community engagement requirement had posted web page content describing forthcoming changes associated with the 2025 budget reconciliation act (P.L. 119-12, OBBBA). Some websites provide high-level descriptions of key provisions (e.g., qualifying beneficiary ages, qualifying activities, and exemptions), while others include more detailed information reflecting state-specific policy decisions, educational messages, and suggested steps that beneficiaries, providers, managed care plans (MCPs), and community-based stakeholders can take now (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. States with a Community Engagement Web Page

For example, 鈥檚 website describes the requirements for, and provides examples of, acceptable documentation Medicaid members may use to demonstrate compliance or eligibility for an exemption. Ohio also offers a  that contains frequently asked questions (FAQs) and draft outreach materials to support stakeholder communications and increase awareness. The communications tools include a one-page flyer, a rack card, and potential social media posts to raise awareness of the changes, with some use of QR codes to enhance quick access to key websites like the beneficiary self-service portal.

2. States are Beginning to Make and Communicate Preliminary Policy Decisions

States must make a range of policy decisions, including the penalty start date, the number of required months of compliance for both the initial application and subsequent renewals, the potential adoption of short-term hardship exceptions, and how exceptions are defined and operationalized. While most states anticipate compliance beginning January 1, 2027, in alignment with OBBBA, Nebraska and Montana have announced plans to begin implementation in 2026, and their websites reflect additional policy details to support accelerated timelines.

A handful of states, including Arkansas and Ohio, also are communicating ahead of OBBBA鈥檚 timeline to promote awareness and engagement before the work and community engagement requirement becomes effective. Table 1 summarizes examples of the current state planning[1] around the number of required months of compliance for the initial application and renewals.

Table 1. Sample Number of Months in Compliance

States also are taking different approaches to exemptions and short-term exceptions. Although many exemptions and exceptions are defined in statute, the interpretation of 鈥渕edically frail鈥 remains an area in which states have significant flexibility, with implications for how many individuals are exempt. Many states have experiences with establishing definitions of medically frail. For example, states that offer an adult benefit package that differs from the state plan benefit package must allow medically frail adults to opt in to the state plan. At least 12 states already make medically frail determinations, and these existing policies and processes may inform approaches for work and community engagement requirements.

One of those states鈥擭evada鈥攈as posted a  with a request for public comment, including a sample list of qualifying medical conditions. Although such lists can provide clarity, they also underscore the importance of a clear and straightforward exemption request process to support appropriate determinations, including for individuals with conditions that are omitted from a specified list.

3. States Are Securing Additional Support to Address Administrative Challenges

The new eligibility criteria, coupled with more frequent eligibility checks, are placing substantial new demands on Medicaid agencies, eligibility systems, and personnel. In response, states are considering or actively pursuing a range of approaches to strengthen administrative capacity. Examples include:

  • Hiring new state eligibility and enrollment workers:听Indiana and Montana
  • Funding system enhancements and improvements:听Alaska and New Jersey
  • Hiring outreach and engagement contractors:听Arizona and Arkansas

States are also proposing to take a more coordinated, cross-agency approach that uses other state agencies and programs as data sources and referral pathways to help beneficiaries meet their work and community engagement requirements. A variety of states are looking to leverage data from their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program to facilitate compliance checks, and Kentucky has  receiving data from a variety of sources (e.g., Department of Revenue, Department of Corrections, Unemployment Insurance, Vital Statistics, and others) to more automatically identify eligibility and exemption changes.

States like Hawaii, Montana, and Nebraska have highlighted their labor departments to connect people to job and community service resources. Virginia鈥檚 work and community engagement website directs the public to a series of different programs based on whether they are interested in employment, volunteer, or education resources. Minnesota also has introduced legislation proposing collaboration between the commissioner and county agencies to link beneficiaries to other critical services like job training, childcare, and transportation.

Shrinking federal contributions and constraints on Medicaid revenue strategies鈥攕uch as limits on provider taxes鈥攁re prompting states to rethink how Medicaid agencies operate within existing budgets. Limited federal funding to support administrative needs elevates the importance of efficiency, coordination, and automation.

What States Might Do to Chart a Better Path Forward

A robust pre-implementation plan is critical to successful work and community engagement implementation. A well-documented plan helps states fully document the variety of moving parts across policy, systems, and partners, clarify milestones and decision points, and define what readiness looks like in practice.

Key components of a pre-implementation plan may include:

  • Signing agreements and contracts to support infrastructure.听Pre-implementation planning should ensure that appropriate support from third-party vendors and sister agencies is secured to optimize flexibilities and manage the requirements. Examples may include maintenance of effort (MOE) agreements, memoranda of understanding (MOU), contract updates, and requests for proposals (RFP) as appropriate. States may need to use expedited contracting vehicles when available and maximize existing vendor arrangements. Agreements should address data governance, privacy, and cost allocation issues to support smooth operational integration and reduce downstream friction.
  • Quantifying and automating exemptions.听Systems and reporting should be updated to identify, notify, and manage cases for expansion adults who are likely exempt. Leveraging additional resources and data matching may help states identify common exempt populations, such as caretakers with dependents under age 14, disabled veterans, and pregnant women without requiring additional verification. Understanding the demographics of the remaining nonexempt population may also be useful in outreach, education, and links to supports.
  • Preparing for readiness review, including system readiness, coverage transition, and churn management.听Pre-implementation plans should prioritize robust system testing, staff training, and timely updates to required documentation (e.g., state plan amendments, policy and member manuals, notices, and reviewing and approving MCP communications). Building in clear transition supports for individuals who may lose coverage or transition to other coverage options can improve continuity of coverage, reduce uninsurance and uncompensated care, and limit administrative burden following implementation.
  • MCP contracts.听Most enrollees subject to work and community engagement requirements are enrolled in Medicaid MCPs. States will need to describe enhanced roles and responsibilities in both the MCP contracts as well as the rates. Clear contract expectations can support transparency and mutual accountability across partners.
  • Test communications with the target audiences to ensure understanding and appropriate action.听Awareness of the new work and community engagement requirement was one of the biggest challenges Arkansas faced when it launched its program in 2018. Beneficiaries also struggled to understand whether the requirement applied to them and what they needed to do to comply. States must build communications plans and messaging to clearly address these issues to reduce the number of beneficiaries losing coverage simply because they did not understand the new requirements.
Connect with Us

红领巾瓜报 (红领巾瓜报) Medicaid experts assist Medicaid and state policymakers with the following:

  • Strategic positioning
  • Policy-to-operations design
  • Cross-agency governance and partner alignment
  • Information systems impact assessment, change planning, testing strategies and readiness metrics
  • Scenario planning and beneficiary impact analysis
  • Communications and operational playbooks
  • Program integrity, reporting, and audit support

红领巾瓜报 Medicaid experts can also assist MCPs, providers, and community-based organizations with:

  • Risk assessments (e.g., enrollment, utilization, and spending impacts)
  • State-specific policy and operational insights and trends
  • Communications, outreach, and engagement strategies and content
  • Member retention strategies
  • Grassroots workforce development and community engagement strategies

For questions, contact 红领巾瓜报 contributors to this article Lora SaundersMatt PowersAndrea Maresca, and Amber Swartzell.

[1] Some of these policies are in pending legislation and, therefore, are subject to change.

Ready to talk?