交叉问题:监测10个州平价医疗法案的实施情况:费率审查

S. Corlette, Kevin W Lucia, Katie Keith
{"title":"交叉问题:监测10个州平价医疗法案的实施情况:费率审查","authors":"S. Corlette, Kevin W Lucia, Katie Keith","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2160520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), the Urban Institute and Georgetown University's Center on Health Insurance Reforms are undertaking a comprehensive monitoring and tracking project to examine the implementation and effects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010. The project began in May 2011 and will take place over several years. The Urban Institute will document changes to the implementation of national health reform in Alabama, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Virginia to help states, researchers and policymakers learn from the process as it unfolds. This report is one of a series of papers focusing on particular implementation issues in these case study states. In addition, state-specific reports on case study states can be found on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Health Policy Center websites. The quantitative component of the project is producing analyses of the effects of the ACA on coverage, health expenditures, affordability, access and premiums in the states and nationally. For more information about the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s work on coverage, visit their website. This paper describes the status of rate review programs in the 10 states participating in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s monitoring and tracking project. Information is drawn from publicly available sources, state legislation, and site visit interviews in each of the 10 states. We summarize how the 10 case study states have enhanced their rate review authority and processes, increased transparency, and expanded consumer outreach in response to the ACA. Although there has been significant variation, all 10 states took some action to improve their rate review process and ensure that insurers’ proposed rates are justified. To a large extent, the actions taken by these states reflect the diversity of approaches to rate review that exist among states nationwide.","PeriodicalId":230649,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"142 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cross-Cutting Issues: Monitoring State Implementation of the Affordable Care Act in 10 States: Rate Review\",\"authors\":\"S. Corlette, Kevin W Lucia, Katie Keith\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2160520\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), the Urban Institute and Georgetown University's Center on Health Insurance Reforms are undertaking a comprehensive monitoring and tracking project to examine the implementation and effects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010. The project began in May 2011 and will take place over several years. The Urban Institute will document changes to the implementation of national health reform in Alabama, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Virginia to help states, researchers and policymakers learn from the process as it unfolds. This report is one of a series of papers focusing on particular implementation issues in these case study states. In addition, state-specific reports on case study states can be found on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Health Policy Center websites. The quantitative component of the project is producing analyses of the effects of the ACA on coverage, health expenditures, affordability, access and premiums in the states and nationally. For more information about the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s work on coverage, visit their website. This paper describes the status of rate review programs in the 10 states participating in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s monitoring and tracking project. Information is drawn from publicly available sources, state legislation, and site visit interviews in each of the 10 states. We summarize how the 10 case study states have enhanced their rate review authority and processes, increased transparency, and expanded consumer outreach in response to the ACA. Although there has been significant variation, all 10 states took some action to improve their rate review process and ensure that insurers’ proposed rates are justified. To a large extent, the actions taken by these states reflect the diversity of approaches to rate review that exist among states nationwide.\",\"PeriodicalId\":230649,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Care Law & Policy eJournal\",\"volume\":\"142 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Care Law & Policy eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2160520\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Law & Policy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2160520","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

在罗伯特·伍德·约翰逊基金会(RWJF)的支持下,城市研究所和乔治城大学健康保险改革中心正在开展一项全面的监测和跟踪项目,以检查2010年《患者保护和平价医疗法案》(ACA)的实施和效果。该项目于2011年5月开始,将持续数年。城市研究所将记录阿拉巴马州、科罗拉多州、马里兰州、密歇根州、明尼苏达州、新墨西哥州、纽约州、俄勒冈州、罗德岛州和弗吉尼亚州实施国家医疗改革的变化,以帮助各州、研究人员和政策制定者从这一进程中学习。本报告是关注这些案例研究州的具体实施问题的系列论文之一。此外,可以在罗伯特·伍德·约翰逊基金会和卫生政策中心的网站上找到关于案例研究州的具体州报告。该项目的定量部分正在分析ACA对各州和全国的覆盖面、保健支出、可负担性、获取和保费的影响。欲了解更多关于罗伯特·伍德·约翰逊基金会在新闻报道方面的工作,请访问他们的网站。本文描述了参与罗伯特伍德约翰逊基金会监测和跟踪项目的10个州的费率审查计划的现状。这些信息来自于公共资源、州立法和10个州的实地访问访谈。我们总结了10个案例研究州如何加强其费率审查权力和流程,提高透明度,并扩大消费者对ACA的响应。尽管有很大的差异,所有10个州都采取了一些行动来改善他们的费率审查过程,并确保保险公司提出的费率是合理的。在很大程度上,这些州采取的行动反映了全国各州之间存在的费率审查方法的多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cross-Cutting Issues: Monitoring State Implementation of the Affordable Care Act in 10 States: Rate Review
With support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), the Urban Institute and Georgetown University's Center on Health Insurance Reforms are undertaking a comprehensive monitoring and tracking project to examine the implementation and effects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010. The project began in May 2011 and will take place over several years. The Urban Institute will document changes to the implementation of national health reform in Alabama, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Virginia to help states, researchers and policymakers learn from the process as it unfolds. This report is one of a series of papers focusing on particular implementation issues in these case study states. In addition, state-specific reports on case study states can be found on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Health Policy Center websites. The quantitative component of the project is producing analyses of the effects of the ACA on coverage, health expenditures, affordability, access and premiums in the states and nationally. For more information about the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s work on coverage, visit their website. This paper describes the status of rate review programs in the 10 states participating in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s monitoring and tracking project. Information is drawn from publicly available sources, state legislation, and site visit interviews in each of the 10 states. We summarize how the 10 case study states have enhanced their rate review authority and processes, increased transparency, and expanded consumer outreach in response to the ACA. Although there has been significant variation, all 10 states took some action to improve their rate review process and ensure that insurers’ proposed rates are justified. To a large extent, the actions taken by these states reflect the diversity of approaches to rate review that exist among states nationwide.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Role of Law in End-of-Life Decision-Making: Perspectives of Patients, Substitute Decision-Makers and Families Phasing Out Certificate-of-Need Laws: A Menu of Options Prospect Patents, Data Markets and the Commons in Data Driven Medicine. Openness and the Political Economy of Intellectual Property Rights Grandma Got Run Over by the Doctor: An Examination of the End of Life Choice Bill with Reference to the German Approach Credit, Default, and Optimal Health Insurance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1