ϱ

Insights

ϱ Insights - Blog

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

534 Results found.

Connecting the Dots: Key Trends, Plan Shifts, and 2027 NBPP Changes Affecting ACA Marketplace Enrollment

Read Blog

Explore how 2026 ACA Marketplace enrollment shifts, plan selection trends, and the 2027 NBPP changes are impacting affordability, market stability, and state strategies. 

Recent ϱ (ϱ) webinars and reports discussed that Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace enrollment trends are evolving rapidly and the takeaways go beyond total enrollment numbers. In addition in May, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) finalized the 2027 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters (NBPP), introducing new flexibility for plans and states alongside stronger program integrity requirements. 

To understand how these changes are reshaping the ACA Marketplace,  Andrea Maresca spoke with Zach Sherman, Managing Director for Coverage Policy and Program Design at ϱ as well as , PhD, Principal at Wakely, and , Principal at Leavitt Partners, both ϱ companies.

Q: The recent Wakely analysis has been central to understanding what’s happening with ACA enrollment. What should people be paying closest attention to? 

Michael Cohen: The key takeaway is that ACA Marketplace trends are about much more than the enrollment numbers. The plans consumers choose, how long they maintain coverage over the course of 2026, and the evolving picture of the morbidity and demographics of the enrolled population are all critical factors for understanding the ACA Marketplace.

ܰ𳦱Գfound thatonly about 86 percent of enrollees paid their firstpremiumin2026.That’sa strong indicator that affordability pressures are already affecting coveragestability.

Q: Where are these enrollment changes showing up most clearly?  

Michael Cohen: One data point that stood out is the number of new consumers in 2026, which was down 13 percent compared with prior years.  

The impact also shows up in coverage losses and consumer plan selection. Some consumers are dropping coverage altogether, while others are making tradeoffs to stay covered. These consumers are moving to lower-premium products—particularly from silver to bronze plans—which offer less robust coverage and higher out-of-pocket costs. Both trends matter, especially when thinking about access and financial risk. 

Q: How are enrollment shifts affecting broader ACA Marketplace stability? 

Zach Sherman: It varies by state, but there are notable trends. States that are using the Federally Facilitated Exchange (FFE) and expanded Medicaid saw the largest enrollment declines.  

Notably, non-expansion states on the FFE significantly outperformed expansion states. This was surprising because, with enhanced subsidies ending, the biggest net premium hit consumers would feel is at the lowest income levels, yet that’s where we saw most enrollment growth. 

Across the individual states, the enrollment shifts have real implications for stability. When healthier individuals leave the market—or shift to less comprehensive coverage—it can put pressure on premiums and risk pools. Issuers are taking this information to begin to make estimates for their 2027 pricing and what this means for their 2026 performance.  

At the same time, CMS is introducing new flexibilities in the final 2027 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters. 

Q: What are the most important changes in the 2027 final rule? 

Zach Sherman: Broadly, the rule makes a clear push toward increased flexibility for consumers, plans, and state regulators. 

One of the categories of changes is around expanded availability of lower premium plans with higher out-of-pocket costs. For example, catastrophic plans can now be offered for up to 10 years. 

CMS also removed certain requirements for standardized plans and relaxed limits on non-standard plan offerings. That gives issuers more room for plan design innovation, but it also means a more complex landscape and plan selection experience for consumers. 

One of the most notable changes is the introduction of non-network plans as qualified health plans. These plans don’t rely on traditional provider networks, which could lower costs while introducing new considerations for access and consumer experience.  

We’re seeing a shift toward allowing more tailored options and potentially less standardized marketplace programs. It will require a different approach from regulators, and it creates a different type of experience for consumers.  

Q: CMS is intensely focused on addressing fraud, waste and abuse. How is that playing out in the Marketplace program? 

Zach Sherman: Program integrity is a central theme in the 2027 final rule, too. It includes stronger eligibility verification, increased oversight of brokers and marketing practices, and new safeguards to reduce improper enrollments. So while there’s more flexibility in plan design, CMS is pairing it with more scrutiny on how the system operates. 

Q: Where do states fit in all of this? 

Zach Sherman: The final rule gives states more authority in key areas, including oversight of plan network adequacy and essential community provider compliance. We’re deep into discussions with states and health plan issuers about the changes they’re interested in exploring for their state. States will have to decide how to use that flexibility to balance affordability, access, and stability. 

Although many of the provisions take effect in the 2027 plan year, regulators and plans are receiving this information fairly late in the cycle which will make it difficult to incorporate some of the flexibilities. We’re anticipating robust discussions to continue next year and expect to see more variation starting in plan year 2028. 

Differences and Alignment in Federal ACA Marketplace Policy Discussions  

Q: Stepping back from the 2027 NBPP, what should interest-holders know about the evolution of the broader policy landscape? 

Liz Wroe: Members of Congress will need to see the 2027 rates being filed before they consider taking action. Even then, there’s no consensus on several key issues that prevented a bipartisan deal to bring back enhanced subsidies in 2025. 

Instead everyone has transitioned to a larger affordability conversation, and we’ll spend this year working on the policies with a goal of moving forward in 2027.  

There are different approaches to affordability and coverage that are driven by fundamentally different philosophies on how to structure the market. Some proposals focus on expanding subsidies, reducing cost sharing, and strengthening ACA protections. Others emphasize consumer-directed models like defined contributions, health savings accounts, and expanded use of ICHRAs [Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Accounts] as well as broader access to lower premium plans. 

There are also several areas of bipartisan alignment. Prior authorization reform is a big one. There’s broad agreement that the current system creates administrative burden and delays in care. 

We’re also seeing common interest in policy approaches to strengthen medical loss ratio [MLR] requirements, expand price transparency, and address provider consolidation. 

Even if there is divided government after the November elections, these are areas where policy action may be more likely. States, health plans, providers, and other interest holders will want to monitor these issues now for signals of what may move forward later this year or in the next Congress. 

Stakeholder Opportunities to Inform Marketplace Programs 

Q: What should stakeholders be focused on right now? 

Michael Cohen: For issuers, it’s about understanding how these changes affect pricing, enrollment, and risk. There’s more uncertainty in how plans should be priced. 

Zach Sherman: For states, the focus should be on strategy. The choices they make now on plan oversight, market structure, and consumer protections will shape outcomes for several years. Additionally, there were several proposed Marketplace policies that CMS did not finalize in the 2027 rule—State-Based Exchange Enhanced Direct Enrollment Model—that CMS is likely to revisit in future rules, including the 2028 NBPP.   

Liz Wroe: Broadly, stakeholders should recognize that we’re in a transition period. The market is evolving, and policy is still catching up. 

Connecting the Dots: Enrollment, Rules, Regulators, and the ACA Marketplace 

For stakeholders across the healthcare landscape, navigating this environment requires both technical expertise and strategic insight. 

ϱ works across policy, actuarial, and operational domains to help states, health plans, and other stakeholders translate these developments into actionable strategies—whether that means evaluating market risk, designing programs, or preparing for future policy scenarios. 

To explore these issues in more detail, access ϱ’s webinar discussions and briefs, including: 

Whatyou missed in 2025—and why you should join us in 2026

Read Blog

Last year’s ϱ conference brought together healthcare leaders to confront a changing landscape across Medicare, Medicaid, and the Marketplace. The agenda reflected the issues shaping the industry in real time: public policy in motion, the future of value-based care, behavioral health innovation, digital transformation, population health, and the partnerships needed to turn strategy into results. From keynote and plenary conversations to focused workshops and collaborative small-group sessions, attendees were immersed in practical discussions about what comes next. 

Want a quick look at what made the 2025 conference so valuable?  

Those conversations matter even more now. Join ϱ’s annual conference, US Healthcare 2026: Signals, Signs & Flashing Lights, October 5–7 in New Orleans. This year’s event is designed for executives and leaders across providers, payers, government, and the organizations that enable care delivery, with a clear focus on helping attendees navigate financial pressure, performance demands, and AI-driven change. Early registration is already underway, with early-bird pricing available through August 7. 

If you look back at last year’s agenda, you can see how well it anticipated this moment. In three fast-moving days, this year’s conference will help attendees read policy and market signals earlier and translate them into decisions, manage risk and costs while protecting outcomes and access, learn what is working to sustain systems of care amid uncertainty, how to apply AI and emerging technology through real operational and clinical use cases, and build relationships through structured networking across sectors. These priorities come to life across four central themes: managing risk and costs, sustaining systems of care, AI and innovation, and partnerships and collaboration. Together, they reflect exactly what healthcare leaders need now: practical strategies for a more complex environment, clearer paths to stability, measurable approaches to innovation, and stronger models for delivery and community impact. 

The 2026 conference is not just another industry event. It is an opportunity to step away from day-to-day demands and engage with peers facing the same questions about cost, risk, performance, access, and technology adoption. Whether you lead strategy, operations, policy, clinical transformation, product development, or partnerships, you will leave with practical insights you can put to work right away. The value is not only in hearing what is next, but in understanding what to do now. 

Attendees this year can expect the same cross-sector depth that stood out last year, paired with even greater urgency. The forces affecting Medicare, Medicaid, Marketplace, and adjacent programs are not moving in isolation. Payment reform connects to access. Digital transformation connects to quality and workforce realities. Behavioral health connects to community capacity, and long-term sustainability, and governmental policy changes drive all of the above. The organizations that succeed will be the ones that can see these connections early and act on them thoughtfully. 

Last year’s conference showed the value of bringing more than 350 policymakers, providers, payers, advisors, innovators, and community leaders into the same conversation. This year offers the chance to continue that conversation at exactly the right time. If you want insight that is strategic, grounded, and immediately relevant to the decisions in front of you, come join us in New Orleans this October. 

 to take advantage of Early Bird pricing, which ends August 7. 

Michigan Health Policy Conference 2026: Medicaid, OBBBA, and State Budget Impacts

Read Blog

Michigan is preparing for significant Medicaid and budget changes under the 2025 federal budget reconciliation law (P.L. 119-21, OBBBA), with more than 200,000 residents at risk of losing healthcare coverage. At the 2026 Michigan State of Reform Conference, state leaders and stakeholders highlighted implementation challenges, fiscal pressures, and strategies to maintain access to care. 

On May 5, 2026,  (SOR), an ϱ Company, hosted its annual , bringing together over 200 interest-holders, including providers, policymakers, and community-based organizations to examine how Michigan is adapting to rapid change and implementing new federal requirements.

The conference fostered candid discussion of the implications of the 2025 federal budget reconciliation act (P.L 119-21, OBBBA), with a particular focus on community engagement requirements, behavioral health, Michigan’s budget outlook, and the Rural Health Transformation Program (RHTP). 

Michigan DHHS’s Top Health Policy Priorities in 2026 

The day opened with a presentation from Meghan Groen, Chief Deputy Director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Ms. Groen shared her department’s priorities and strategies, including implementation of OBBBA requirements and RHTP.  

Medicaid community engagement requirements and six-month eligibility redeterminations are the most immediate operational challenges for DHHS. Michigan also is advancing a set of readiness activities, including internal assessments, coordinated planning, leadership alignment, and regular communication with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). 

Another top priority Ms. Groen identified was expanded access to behavioral health. In a discussion focused on programmatic changes in behavioral health, panelists discussed how Michigan is using multiple tools, including Certified Community Behavioral Health Centers (CCBHCs), crisis stabilization units, and psychiatric residential treatment facilities (PRTFs), to address access gaps. Panelists Kristen Morningstar, Director of Michigan’s Bureau of Specialty Behavioral Health Services and Robert Sheehan, Chief Executive Officer, Community Mental Health Association of Michigan, shared how DHHS continues to collaborate with behavioral health providers to optimize service delivery and better meet member needs. 

How OBBBA Will Affect Michigan Medicaid Coverage and the State Budget 

Across sessions, speakers—including Danielle Devine, Market President at McLaren Health Plan, and Jen Flood, Budget Director for the State of Michigan—highlighted how OBBBA is already reshaping Michigan’s Medicaid program and broader fiscal outlook. These changes have direct implications for Medicaid financing and long-term planning and are a driver for the state’s $1 billion budget shortfall. Significantly, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has recommended approximately $800 million in new taxes from tobacco and vaping to supplement the budget. The governor has also formed a working group of hospitals, health plans, providers, and other stakeholders to identify options for saving $150 million. 

DHHS projects that more than 200,000 individuals in Michigan are at risk of losing Medicaid coverage. Panelists discussed the downstream effects, including disruptions in care, a rising rate of uninsured residents, and increased financial strain on families and providers. Stakeholders shared concerns about increases in uncompensated care, food insecurity, and household debt. 

Panelists emphasized that navigating this environment will require close collaboration across the delivery system. 

How Michigan Is Using the Rural Health Transformation Program 

Amid the broader changes in the healthcare landscape, RHTP is emerging as a key strategy for sustaining and strengthening access to care in Michigan’s rural communities. Speakers such as Lauren LaPine-Ray, DrPH, MPH, Vice President, Policy & Rural Health at the Michigan Health & Hospital Association, emphasized the importance of aligning financing strategies, partnerships, and policy levers to optimize the impact of these investments. Michigan has already  RHTP funding to multiple entities to support implementation at the local level. 

Looking Ahead 

The challenges that Michigan is facing are not unique, and the need for shared insight and practical solutions is only growing. 

If you are looking for strategies and solutions to address urgent healthcare policy and operational challenges, ϱ experts are available to help navigate these complex changes and identify practical paths forward. 

ϱ (ϱ),  brings together state leaders, providers, plans, and community organizations to surface real-world strategies for navigating federal change. Join us in  on May 21, 2026, or visit the  to view the full conference schedule and register for an upcoming event. 

State of Reform develops its conference agendas through collaboration with ϱ subject matter experts/market leads and stakeholders across the public and private sectors, including state officials, community-based organizers, providers, payers, and more. 

National Collaborative Launched to Strengthen US Behavioral Health Crisis System

Read Blog

National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) and ϱ (ϱ) launch the National Collaborative for Crisis Systems Innovation 

The United States is facing an escalating behavioral health crisis, with growing demand for mental health and substance use services and persistent gaps in access to timely, appropriate care. In response, the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) and ϱ (ϱ) have launched the National Collaborative for Crisis Systems Innovation, a new initiative focused on improving how the United States responds to people in mental health crisis

This collaborative effort comes at a critical moment for the national crisis response system, as policymakers, providers, and communities work to build on recent investments and make further progress on sustainable, systemwide changes so that people experiencing a mental health crisis receive the care they need and deserve. 

The Crisis Response System Still Needs Improvement 

The launch of the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline in 2022 marked a major milestone, making it easier for individuals to access immediate behavioral health support. Although the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline has driven recent progress, significant challenges remain in the US mental health crisis system, including: 

  • Rising demand for crisis services
  • Limited access to community-based behavioral healthservices
  • Fragmentation across crisis responses systems
  • Overreliance on emergency departments and law enforcement

Experts increasingly agree that 988 is only one component of a comprehensive crisis system. Effective systems must also include: 

  • Mobile crisis response teams
  • Crisis stabilization facilities
  • Ongoing care coordination and follow-up services

The National Collaborative represents the next phase of work and will focus on connecting these pieces into a more integrated and sustainable system. 

The National Collaborative Is a New Phase of Crisis System Transformation 

Building on four years of foundational work since the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline launched in 2022, the National Collaborative is designed to strengthen the full continuum of behavioral health crisis care, from initial contact to stabilization and follow-up services. 

Its overarching goal is to ensure that individuals experiencing a mental health crisis receive timely, appropriate care rooted in dignity and support. The National Collaborative will: 

  • Serve as a nationwidehub for coordination, learning, and action
  • Bring together public and private stakeholdersacross sectors
  • Supportstates and communities in building coordinated, person-centered crisis response systems
  • Advance innovation and shared solutions to improve outcomes

The launch of this collaborative also reflects a broader shift in national focus—from expanding access to improving system performance and long-term sustainability. This approach recognizes that meaningful progress will require coordination across healthcare, social services, and community-based organizations. 

Why This Matters 

For state Medicaid agencies, health plans, and providers, the collaborative provides a platform to: 

  • Learn from peers across states and sectors
  • Access emerging policy and implementation insights
  • Align local strategies with national priorities in crisis care

As crisis system transformation accelerates, coordinated efforts like this one will be essential to sustain momentum and improve outcomes. 

In the coming months, NAMI and ϱ will engage key interest-holders and experts to identify and elevate the urgent needs in crisis response and ensure alignment on shared outcomes to improve crisis systems. Public and private organizations interested in improving behavioral health crisis systems are encouraged to engage with the . 

For more information on ϱ’s work in Crisis services, contact Monica Johnson, Managing Director, ϱ. 

Special Alert: CMS Proposes Major Medicaid Payment Reform to Cap State-Directed Payments and Align Rates with Medicare

Read Blog

On May 20, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)a proposed rule aimed at curbing state Medicaid payment practices that federal regulators have driven excessive federal spending without clear improvements in care. The rule, which implements new statutory requirements approved as part of the 2025 budget reconciliation act (P.L. 119-21, OBBBA) proposes to cap certain state-directed and targeted provider payments and is seeking to better align them with Medicare payment levels. These financial arrangements include healthcare related provider taxes and intergovernmental transfers.

If finalized,CMSprojects therule willresultinsignificantfederalsavings over time andwillrefocus Medicaid funding on patient care, strengthen oversight, and ensure that supplemental payments are tied to measurable improvements in quality, access, and outcomes rather than financing strategies that increase costs without corresponding value.ϱ(ϱ)experts arecontinuing toreviewthe proposed Medicaid payment reformand will provideadditionalanalysis infuturenewsletters and communications tointerest-holders.

Turning Insight into Action: The New Operating Reality in Behavioral Health

Read Blog

Thousands of behavioral health leaders, clinicians, advocates, and industry partners convened during NatCon 2026, April 27–29 in Denver, CO—one of the sector’s largest annual gatherings. This year, the event was more focused and pragmatic than in recent years. Although behavioral health providers still face significant pressure, there was also a noticeable shift toward how organizations can move toward sustainable models for growth, technology adoption, and integrated care delivery.

ϱ (ϱ) colleagues attended the event to listen, connect, and contribute to the meaningful conversations. Many of the themes and industry trends we have been tracking emerged consistently throughout the conference. In this article, our behavioral health experts discuss their collective insights and the road ahead for behavioral health interest-holders.

Key Themes fromNatCon2026

Financial resilienceremained at the forefront.

Behavioral health organizations continue to respond to constrained funding conditions, evolving reimbursement dynamics, and the need to diversify revenue beyond unstable and uncertain grant support and rate reimbursement volatility.

Operational visibility was closely tiedtofinancial resilience.

Leaders discussed the need for a clearer, more real-time understanding of their performance. Performance was considered broadly to include financial indicators, clinical outcomes, and workforce capacity. Data and measurement have moved from a “nice to have” to “essential” for effective engagement with payers.

Innovationconversations are shifting towardimplementation.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and digital tools were still hot topics, but the discussion has moved toward implementation and effective deployment. Conversations centered on practical use cases such as clinical documentation support, measurement-based care linked to improved health outcomes, and better integration with electronic health records (EHR).

This year’s conference highlighted enduring opportunities and challenges for the field, including:

  • Core service priorities,such ascrisis response,suicide prevention, collaborative careandincreased opportunities aroundCertified Community Behavioral Health Clinics(CCHBCs), and value-based payment strategiesfor financial resilience
  • Workforce sustainability, with organizations lookingto reduce administrative burden, strengthen recruitment and retention, and support staff well-being while demand for services continues to rise

Behavioral Health Industry Trends

The industry trends emerging from NatCon 2026 suggest that behavioral health organizations are entering a more disciplined operating environment to maximize efficiencies and ensure long-term sustainability in what seems sometimes to be a chaotic environment. Organizations are placing greater emphasis on their Medicaid strategy, managed care contracting, and value-based arrangements that reward outcomes and continuity of care. There is also continued momentum behind integrated models that connect behavioral health with primary care, public health, and community-based supports. Rather than treating mental health and substance use services as isolated programs, providers are increasingly building coordinated systems that address whole-person needs across settings.

Another notable trend is that technology is becoming a clearer differentiator. Some organizations are piloting or scaling technology, while others are taking a more cautious approach. Discussions surrounding AI in particular appeared to have matured significantly, with attention moving from abstract concerns toward change management, sequencing of use cases, return on investment, governance, and clinician trust. In that sense, technology is moving from being a side initiative to a strategic differentiator.

Transformation in the Behavioral Health Field

We were struck by the level of alignment across different parts of the field. Many of the themes we heard reinforced what providers experience daily—the need to manage uncertainty while continuing to meet the growing demand for services and more intentional use of data, infrastructure, and outcomes measurement.

More broadly, the conversations throughout the conference pointed to a field that is moving toward greater pragmatism. There is still a clear need for additional resources, but there is also growing recognition that adaptability will serve an equally important role.

HowWeCanHelp

One of the most valuable aspects of NatCon is the opportunity to compare experiences across organizations and regions. The themes emerging from this year’s conference reflect broader shifts happening across the behavioral health landscape. 

A key role of our team is to connect what we hear in different settings and share it in a way that is useful for others in the field—highlighting emerging approaches, surfacing common challenges, and creating opportunities for peer exchange.

For questions about the market dynamics or approaches to strengthen your organization’s adaptability,  contact one of our ϱ experts.

Why Children’s Behavioral Health Demands Action Now

Read Blog

Practical Strategies for Medicaid, Schools, Hospitals, and Communities

During Children’s Mental Health Awareness Week, May 3–9, and Mental Health Awareness Month, we are spotlighting actionable solutions across the US children’s behavioral health system. This post is intended for children’s behavioral health providers, state Medicaid agencies, school-based health centers, hospitals, local government agencies, local education agencies (LEAs), child welfare agencies, and philanthropic organizations that are working to strengthen prevention, crisis response, care coordination, and community-based continuums of care. ϱ has a robust and growing team of behavioral health experts who support this work and have developed a series of case studies showcasing practical strategies implemented with clients—from crisis system design and referral pathway improvements to financing and implementation roadmaps.

Children’s Mental Health Awareness Week is a reminder that children’s behavioral health and youth mental health are not niche issues. They are systemic issues that require coordinated action across Medicaid, education, public health, hospitals and health systems, child welfare, and local government—especially where schools and community partners are on the front line.

The need remains substantial. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s results, released in 2024, showed that 40% of high school students reported persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness, even as some measures improved from 2021 levels. CDC also highlighted how bullying, safety concerns at school, racism, unfair discipline, and frequent social media use are tied to youth mental health risks.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMHSA’s) , released in 2025, adds another important dimension. Among adolescents ages 12–17, the 2024 survey found that:

  • 15.4% experienced a major depressive episode within the past year
  • 10.1% had serious thoughts of suicide
  • About 40% who had a major depressive episode in the past year did not receive mental health treatment

The data show that progress is possible when systems respond with real capacity, access, and support. That is why this moment calls for more than awareness. It calls for action that is operational, financeable, and grounded in what works.

At ϱ, we work with child-serving systems that are trying to solve real problems, including how to strengthen crisis response, improve referral pathways, build a more coherent continuum of care, and connect strategy with implementation.

Over the coming weeks, we will feature three examples that reflect different parts of the children’s behavioral health landscape.

1. Children’s hospital mental health strategy and crisis response

This case study will highlight work to help a children’s hospital strengthen its mental health approach and support next-stage crisis system design.

In this engagement, ϱ partnered with Rady Children’s Hospital Orange County to move pediatric behavioral health from strategy to implementation—aligning emergency department (ED) mental health workflows, clarifying pediatric crisis pathways, building an investment-ready fiscal pro forma, and advancing priority programs to strengthen access and care coordination. This work can inform hospitals and health systems, Medicaid agencies, and community partners seeking to reduce ED boarding and improve pediatric crisis response.

2. County-level ecosystem and referral system improvement

This case study will show how local systems can bring multiple stakeholders together to improve referral pathways and make behavioral health more accessible for children, youth, and families.

ϱ supported a county-led effort to strengthen cross-system referral pathways by aligning agencies around shared intake and triage practices, clearer roles and accountability, and more navigable access points for families. This approach is relevant for local government agencies, LEAs, school-based health centers, child welfare agencies, and community providers working to reduce fragmentation and speed connection to the right level of care.

3. Building a stronger children’s behavioral health continuum in New Orleans

This case study will focus on assessing gaps, identifying opportunities, and supporting a more coherent community-based continuum for children’s behavioral health.

ϱ helped deliver the first integrated view of pediatric behavioral health in New Orleans, LA, aligning schools, healthcare, philanthropy, and government around a shared understanding of unmet needs and critical system gaps, as well as charting a prioritized roadmap to strengthen and better coordinate the continuum of care.

What It Means for Key Child-Serving Audiences

  • Children’s behavioral health providers: Prepare for stronger care coordination expectations (warm handoffs, follow-up after crisis, shared care plans) and increased demand for community-based alternatives to the ED
  • State Medicaid agencies: Focus on financeable crisis continuums (including pediatric crisis response), payment and contracting approaches that support access and continuity, and data/reporting that demonstrates outcomes
  • School-based health centers and LEAs: Strengthen referral pathways, clarify roles between schools and providers, and build protocols that support early identification while keeping students connected to safe learning environments
  • Hospitals and health systems: Improve pediatric ED mental health workflows, create clearer crisis pathways, and develop investment-ready business cases for behavioral health capacity and partnerships
  • Local government agencies: Convene cross-system partners, establish shared intake/triage and accountability, and use implementation roadmaps to move from planning to operational change
  • Child welfare agencies: Align behavioral health access for children and youth involved with child welfare, reduce handoff failures, and integrate crisis planning into placement stability and permanency strategies
  • Philanthropy: Target catalytic investments that fill continuum gaps, build capacity for implementation (not just planning), and support cross-system governance and measurement

The common thread among these examples is a simple belief: Children’s behavioral health improvement does not happen through aspiration alone. It happens when organizations and public systems translate urgency into design, partnerships, financing strategies, and implementation steps.

That is also why children’s behavioral health is so relevant. National data still point to high levels of distress and suicide risk among adolescents, despite recent improvements. CDC’s findings show how strongly youth mental health is shaped by the environments in which they live, learn, and play—especially their schools and communities.

For leaders in Medicaid, behavioral health, child welfare, education, county government, hospitals, and provider organizations, the question is not whether children’s behavioral health deserves attention, but rather is how to build systems that respond earlier, coordinate better, and support children and families more effectively.

We hope this series contributes to that conversation by sharing practical examples of work that can inform future action.

Other Resources on Children’s Behavioral Health and Youth Mental Health

Contact us to discuss how ϱ can support your children’s behavioral health strategy—whether you work for a Medicaid agency, hospital/health system, school-based health partner, LEA, local government agency, child welfare agency, provider organization, or philanthropic funder. We can help with crisis continuum planning, care coordination design, referral pathway improvement, financing and pro forma development, and implementation support.

Join us at ϱ’s 2026 National Conference: Signals, Signs & Flashing Lights

Read Blog

Registration is now open for the ϱ (ϱ) 2026 National Conference, , October 5–7 in New Orleans, LA. 

 is intentionally structured to bring together leaders who are shaping decisions across sectors—those setting policy, managing risk, leading clinical operations, and innovating approaches to improve outcomes—to engage in candid conversations about what is working, what is not, and what is changing in  and adjacent programs. In an environment defined by new challenges and “flashing lights,” even the most seasoned healthcare leaders will find value in stepping out of their day‑to‑day roles to compare strategies, test assumptions, and learn from peers facing similar pressures. 

This year’s conference is designed to reflect the environment healthcare leaders are navigating today—one defined less by policy certainty and more by shifting expectations and competing pressures on cost, access, and performance. Our experts are crafting discussions to address how organizations are approaching policy engagement in this environment, including new strategies for interpreting signals from federal and state policymakers and negotiating policy frameworks that directly shape market dynamics. 

Across plenary sessions, breakout discussions, and ϱ’s signature coffee conversations, the conference will focus on how organizations are interpreting these signals and translating them into practical strategies. 

Programming will center on four cross-cutting themes shaping healthcare decision-making: 

  • Managingrisk and cost amid continued financial pressure. Discussions will examinethe drivers ofutilizationand affordability trends across Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial markets and whichstrategies aredemonstratingmeasurable impact.
  • Sustaining access and system stability. The agenda also will focus on how providers, health systems, and state programs are maintaining access amid workforce challenges, coverage transitions, and ongoing financial strain.
  • Turning innovation into impact.Sessions will explore where artificial intelligence(AI)and digital health tools are delivering measurable operational or clinical impactandwhat it takes to implement them effectively.
  • Building partnershipsthat last.Conversationwill highlight how stakeholders arealigning incentives,funding,and strategy to move from short-termresponses to long-term, sustainablesolutions.

As in prior years, the ϱ National Conference is structured to support candid dialogue, actionable takeaways, and meaningful connections. Attendees consistently highlight the opportunity to move beyond high-level trends and engage in practical discussions that inform decision-making in their organizations. 

 is now available for a limited time. The  includes new opportunities for your organization. Additional agenda details, featured speakers, and interactive programming announcements will be released in the coming weeks. 

Outlook 2026: A Conversation on Medicare Draft Payment Rules

Read Blog

As the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)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,Jen Colamonico, Vice President, Strategy and Communications at ϱ (ϱ), caught up with Senior Consulting Actuary with Wakley, an ϱ Company. Of particular interest was CMS’s 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’t 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’s decision to phase out Medicare’s 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’t 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’s still unclear what’s driving those trends—whether its assumptions related to the IPO list removal or other factors. We’ve asked CMS for more clarity. From an actuarial standpoint, understanding what’s 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’s not necessarily a one directional loss. 

Q: Does that mean the overall impact may be less dramatic than it appears?
Rachel: Potentially, yes—especially 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’s 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’t 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’re 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’t 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—especially those affecting benchmarks—the 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. 

ϱ’s 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’s payment landscape continues to evolve. 

For additional insights, listen to Rachel Stewart and Zach Gaumer on ϱ’s 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 ϱ company, published “,” 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’t 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.
  • State variation is significant, ranging from as low as 63% paid in January to as high as 99%.
  • The overallaverageenrollment decrease is estimatedto be between17% and26% lower than 2025,with morbidity projected to worsenby2.9–6.5%.

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 fellapproximately17% from 2025.
  • Bronze enrollment increased by more than 10%.
  • More than13% of2025Gold plan enrolleesselected a lowerpriced,Bronzetier planin 2026.

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

  • Enrollment decreases are lower instates withstate-based marketplaces(SBMs)and expected to stay lower than Healthcare.gov states, largelybecause ofproactive outreach and marketing initiatives,lower net premium increases,and stateaffordabilityprograms.
  • 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: 

  • InGeorgia—theonly SBM without Medicaid expansion—enrollment27% from an estimated1.3million inApril2025 to approximately950,000inApril 2026.
  • InNewJersey—astatewith state-funded premium subsidies,a reinsurance program, and a mandatethatresidents have healthinsurance—enrollment hasby more than 11%sinceApril 2025.
  • InCalifornia—another state with premium subsidies,facilitatedenrollment,and an individual mandate—effectuatedenrollmentby 7%from February 2025 to February 2026.
  • Overall, SBMs arethat coverage dropswere24% higher from January to March 2026 thanduringthe same period in 2025 and thatthe rate of plan shifting from Silver to Bronzeincreasedsignificantly,quadruplingin six states.

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 

ϱ, Inc. (ϱ), 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. 

Contactour experts below with questions about the report andto discuss opportunities to address the trends and forthcoming changes in the market.

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

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—most notably a proposed nationwide expansion of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model. 

These proposed updates underscore CMS’s 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—including the American Hospital Association (AHA) and the Federation of American Hospitals (FAH)—have 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’s 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—a change designed to accelerate feedback and better align measures across programs. 

These changes continue CMS’s 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 ofMS-DRGsincluded in the spinal fusion episode
  • Aligning TEAM quality measurement performance periods with the IQR Program
  • Making targeted technical refinements to paymentmethodology

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
  • Adoption of a more robust risk adjustmentmethodologywith significantly more variables, aligning closely with the TEAM model
  • Introduction of a 5 percent stop-loss policy for hospitalsthatservehigher proportions of dually eligible beneficiaries and certain smaller hospitals

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.
  • Mandatory episode-based modelsremaincentral to CMS’svalue-based strategy, with CJR-Xrepresentinga significant escalation in scope and scale.
  • Program alignment and MA inclusion are accelerating, with implications for hospital data systems, care coordination strategies, and reporting infrastructure.

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 

ϱ, Inc. (ϱ), 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 ϱ (ϱ), 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—including more frequent eligibility determinations and expanded work and community engagement requirements—current enrollment trends provide an early signal of how policy decisions and administrative practices are already influencing coverage levels. 

The ϱ Information Services (ϱIS) analysis shows that Medicaid managed care accounted for 85.6 percent of total Medicaid enrollment in December 2025. This analysis, available to ϱIS subscribers, uses data from nearly 300 health plans in 41 states. The 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 ϱ. The report includes the most recent data obtained and illustrates the effect of state-level choices around eligibility and administration. Key findings include: 

  • As ofDecember2025,Medicaid managed care enrollment across the 37 states declined by2.2 million membersyear over year, falling to 62.5 million—a3.4 percent decrease.
  • Of the 37 states,eight—Colorado, Delaware, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, and Oregon—didnotexperience year-over-yearmanaged care enrollmentdeclines,andinstead showedflat enrollment or modest gains.With the exception of Mississippi, theseareallMedicaid expansion states.
  • Arizonaand Indianaexperienceddouble-digitpercentagedeclines. Notably,Indiana began requiringenrolleesto actively respond to renewal mailers,which aligns withenrollment declines that began in March 2025.
  • Among theexpansion states in the analysis,enrollmentdeclinedby1.7million (-3.3%) to50.8million.Theseven non-expansion statesexperiencedasimilardecline (-3.6%),bringingenrollment to11.7million enrollees.

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. &Բ;

Market Share and Plan Dynamics 

Using our data repository for 300 health plans across 41 states, ϱIS 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). These 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  

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 1,2026,while Montana plans to begin implementation on July 1, 2026. Withadditionalfederal guidance stillemerging, most other states are working toward compliance ahead of January 2027 deadlines.Inexpansionstates,policymakersretainauthority to tighten administrative processes, alter optional benefits, or adjust provider payment levels—actions thatmaymaterially affect enrollment.

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‑net 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  

ϱ is home to experts who know the Medicaid managed care landscapeand how it is evolving. ϱIS’sMedicaidenrollment data, financials,procurementtracking, and a robust library of public documents equips stakeholders withtimely, actionable intelligence.

For more information about the ϱIS subscription, contact Andrea Maresca aԻ Alona Nenko. &Բ;

Ready to talk?