Federal Government Releases Proposal for Essential Health Benefits
Purpose
The purpose of this bulletin is to provide information and solicit comments on the regulatory approach that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) plans to propose to define essential health benefits (EHB) under section 1302 of the Affordable Care Act. This bulletin begins with an overview of the relevant statutory provisions and other background information, reviews research on health care services covered by employers today, and then describes the approach HHS plans to propose. This bulletin only relates to covered services. Plan cost sharing and the calculation of actuarial value are not addressed in this bulletin. We plan to release guidance on calculating actuarial value and the provision of minimum value by employer-sponsored coverage in the near future. In addition, we plan to issue future guidance on essential health benefit implementation in the Medicaid program.
The intended regulatory approach utilizes a reference plan based on employer-sponsored coverage in the marketplace today, supplemented as necessary to ensure that plans cover each of the 10 statutory categories of EHB. In developing this intended approach, HHSsought to balance comprehensiveness, affordability, and State flexibility and to reflectpublic input received to date.
Public input is welcome on this intended approach. Please send comments on the bulletin by January 31, 2012 to: EssentialHealthBenefits@cms.hhs.gov.
Defining Essential Health Benefits
A. Introduction and Background
Statutory Provisions
Section 1302(b) of the Affordable Care Act directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) to define essential health benefits (EHB). Non-grandfathered plans in the individual and small group markets both inside and outside of the Exchanges, Medicaid benchmark and benchmark-equivalent, and Basic Health Programs must cover the EHBbeginning in 2014.
Section 1302(b)(1) provides that EHB include items and services within the following 10 benefit categories: (1) ambulatory patient services, (2) emergency services (3) hospitalization, (4) maternity and newborn care, (5) mental healthand substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment, (6) prescription drugs, (7) rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, (8) laboratory services, (9) preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management, and (10) pediatric services, including oral and vision care.
Self-insured group health plans, health insurance coverage offered in the large group market, and grandfathered health plans are not required to cover the essential health benefits. Section 1302(b)(2) of the Affordable Care Act instructs the Secretary that the scope of EHB shall equal the scope of benefits provided under a typical employer plan. In defining EHB,section 1302(b)(4) directsthe Secretary to establish an appropriate balance among the benefit categories. Further, under this provision, the Secretary must not make coverage decisions, determine reimbursement rates, or establish incentive programs.
Benefits must not be designed in ways that discriminate based on age, disability, or expected length of life, but must consider the health care needs of diverse segments of the population. The Secretary mustsubmit a report to the appropriate committees ofCongress along with a certification from the Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services that the scope of the EHB is equal to the scope of benefits provided under a typical employer plan, as determined by the Secretary.
In addition, section 1311(d)(3) of the Affordable Care Act requires States to defray the cost of any benefits required by State law to be covered by qualified health plans beyond the EHB.
The statute distinguishes between a plan’s covered services and the plan’s cost-sharing features, such as deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance. The cost-sharing features will determine the level of actuarial value of the plan, expressed as a “metal level” as specified in statute: bronze at 60 percent actuarial value, silver at 70 percent actuarial value, gold at 80 percent actuarial value, and platinum at 90 percent actuarial value.
Public and Other Input
To inform the Department’s understanding of the benefits provided by employer plans, HHS has considered a report on employer plans submitted by the Department of Labor (DOL), recommendations on the process for defining and updating EHB from the Institute of Medicine (IOM), and input from the public and other interested stakeholders during a series of public listening sessions detailed below.
Section 1302(b)(2)(A) requires the Secretary of Labor to inform the determination of EHB with a survey of employer-sponsored plans. On April 15, 2011, the DOL issued its report, in satisfaction ofsection 1302(b)(2)(A) of the Affordable Care Act, providing results on the scope of benefits offered under employer-sponsored insurance to HHS.3
The DOL survey provided a broad overview of benefits available to employees enrolled in employer sponsored plans. The report drew on data from the 2008 and 2009 National Compensation Survey (which includes large and small employers), as well as DOL’s supplemental review of health plan Summary Plan Documents, and provided information on the extent to which employees have coverage for approximately 25 services within the 10 categories of EHB outlined in the Affordable Care Act (e.g., a certain percentage of plan participants have coverage for a certain benefit).
In order to receive independent guidance, HHS also commissioned the IOM to recommend a process that would help HHS define the benefits that should be included in the EHB and update the benefits to take into account advances in science, gaps in access, and the effect of any benefit changes on cost. The IOM submitted its consensus recommendations in a report entitled “Essential Health Benefits: Balancing Coverage and Cost” on October 7, 2011
.
In order to balance the cost and comprehensiveness of EHB, the IOM recommended that EHB reflect plans in the small employer market and that the establishment of an EHB package should be guided by a national premium target. The IOM also recommended the development of a framework for updating EHB that would take into account new evidence about effective interventions and changes in provider and consumer preferences while ensuring that the cost of the revised package of benefits remains within predetermined limits as the benefit standards become more specific. The IOM recommended flexibility across States and suggested that States operating their own Exchanges be allowed to substitute a plan that is actuarially equivalent to the national EHB package. The IOM also recommended continued public input throughout the process.
Following the release of the IOM’s recommendations, HHS held a series of sessions with stakeholders, including consumers, providers, employers, plans, and State representatives, in both Washington, D.C. and around the nation to gather public input. Several key themes emerged. Consumer groups and some provider groups expressed concern at the IOM’s emphasis on cost over the comprehensiveness of benefits. Some consumer groups expressed a belief that small group plans may not represent the typical employer plan envisioned by the statute, while employers and health insurance issuers generally supported the IOM conclusion that EHB should be based on small employer plans.
Consumer and provider groups commented that specific benefits should be spelled out by the Secretary, while health insurance issuers and employers commented that they prefer more general guidance, allowing for greater flexibility. Both provider and consumer groups expressed concern about discrimination against individuals with particular conditions. Employers and health insurance issuers stressed concern about resources and urged the Secretary to adopt a more moderate benefit package.
Consumers generally favored a uniform benefits package, and many consumers requested that State mandates be included in the benefits package. Some requested a uniform benefit package so that consumer choice of plan could focus on other plan features such as premium, provider network, and quality improvement. Some employer, health insurance issuer,and State representatives focused on the need for flexibility across the country to reflect local preferences and practices. States, health insurance issuers, and employers emphasized the need for timely guidance in preparing for implementation around EHB.
Click here to view the report in its entirety (pdf).