In March 2003, Massachusetts increased the premiums it charges to most enrollees in its CommonHealth-Working (CH-W) program. This study evaluates the impact of the premium change on disenrollment using a comparison group methodology. The findings indicate that the premium change had only a small, but statistically significant impact on program exits. The CH-W experience differs from other state programs that saw substantial enrollment declines in response to new or increased premiums. This is likely due to factors that make CH-W different from other programs, key of which are administrative procedures intended to minimize disenrollment due to premium nonpayment.
References
1.
ArtigaS.O'MalleyM., 2005. Increasing Premiums and Cost Sharing in Medicaid and SCHIP: Recent State Experiences. Publication No. 7322. Washington, D.C.: Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.
2.
CarlsonM.WrightB., 2005. The Impact of Program Changes on Enrollment, Access, and Utilization in the Oregon Health Plan Standard Population. Salem, Ore.: Oregon Office of Health Policy and Research.
3.
Code of Massachusetts Regulations. 2004. 130 CMR §506.011.
4.
DickA.AllisonR.HaberS.BrachC.ShenkmanE., 2002. Consequences of State Policies for SCHIP Disenrollment. Health Care Financing Review23 (3): 65–88.
5.
FishmanE.CooperB., 2002. Medicaid Buy-In Options: Helping Persons with Disability Work. Baltimore, Md.: Partnership for Solutions, Johns Hopkins University.
6.
FraktA.PizerS.WrobelM., 2005. High Risk Pools for Uninsurable Individuals: Recent Growth, Future Prospects. Health Care Financing Review26 (2): 73–87.
7.
GardnerM.VaronJ., 2004. Moving Immigrants from a Medicaid Look-Alike Program to Basic Health in Washington State: Early Observations. Publication No. 7079. Washington, D.C.: Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.
8.
HolahanJ.BovbjergR.EvansA.WienerJ.FlanaganS., 1998. Health Policy for Low-Income People in Massachusetts. Highlights from State Reports. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
9.
IreysH.WhiteJ.ThorntonC., 2003. The Medicaid Buy-In Program: Quantitative Measures of Enrollment Trends and Participant Characteristics in 2002. Report prepared for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Washington, D.C.: Mathematica Policy Research.
10.
JulnesG.LieseH.MacLeodL.McCormickS.SheenJ.NolanR., 2003. Self-Reported Experiences of Individuals with Disabilities Involved in the Utah Medicaid Work Incentive Program. Salt Lake City: Utah Work Incentives Initiative.
11.
KenneyG.HadleyJ.BlavinF., 2006/2007. The Effects of Public Premiums on Children's Health Insurance Coverage: Evidence from 1999 to 2003. Inquiry43 (4): 345–361.
12.
KenneyG.AllisonR.CostichJ.MartonJ.McFeetersJ., 2006/2007. The Effects of Premium Increases on Enrollment in SCHIP Programs: Findings from Three States. Inquiry43 (4): 378–392.
13.
KuL.2003. Charging the Poor More for Health Care: Cost Sharing in Medicaid. Washington, D.C.: Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
14.
KuL.CoughlinT., 1997. The Use of Sliding Scale Premiums in Subsidized Insurance Programs. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
15.
KuL.CoughlinT., 1999/2000. Sliding-Scale Premium Health Insurance Programs: Four States' Experiences. Inquiry36 (4): 471–480.
16.
KuL.WachinoV., 2005. The Effect of Increased Cost-Sharing in Medicaid: A Summary of Research Findings. Washington, D.C.: Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
17.
LeCouteurG.PerryM.ArtigaS.RousseauD., 2004. The Impact of Medicaid Reductions in Oregon: Focus Group Insights. Washington, D.C.: Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.
18.
MarquisM.BuntinM.EscarceJ.KapurK.YegianJ. M., 2004. Subsidies and the Demand for Individual Health Insurance in California. Health Services Research39 (5): 1547–1570.
19.
MCH Evaluation, Inc. 2003. Results of RIte Care Premium Follow-up Survey. RI Medicaid and Research Evaluation Issue Brief. Issue Brief #4. Cranston, R.I.: Center for Child and Family Health, Rhode Island Department of Human Services.
20.
PATH-Vermont Department of Prevention, Assistance, Transition and Health Access. 2004. Impact of Premiums on the Medicaid Program. Report. Waterbury, Vt.: Vermont Agency of Human Services.
21.
RoyaltyA.HagensJ., 2005. The Effect of Premiums on the Decision to Participate in Health Insurance and Other Fringe Benefits Offered by the Employer: Evidence from a Real-World Experiment. Journal of Health Economics24 (1): 95–112.
22.
RoyaltyA.SolomonN., 1999. Health Plan Choice: Price Elasticities in a Managed Competition Setting. Journal of Human Resources34 (1): 1–41.
23.
SAS Institute Inc. 2003. The Logistic Procedure. SAS/STAT Users Guide. Cary, N.C.: SAS Institute Inc.
24.
SheP.LivermoreG., 2007. Material Hardship, Poverty, and Disability Among Working-Age Adults. Social Science Quarterly88 (4).
25.
ShenkmanB.2004. Healthy Kids Program Changes in State Fiscal Year 2003–2004: Associations with Enrollee Case Mix, Health Care Expenditures, and Disenrollment. Report to the Florida Healthy Kids Corporation. Gainsville: University of Florida, Institute for Child Health Policy.
26.
StrombomB.BuchmuellerT.FeldsteinP., 2002. Switching Costs, Price Sensitivity, and Health Plan Choice. Journal of Health Economics21: 89–116.
