This is a fairly short article. The thing that's noteworthy about my "weighting" is that I had to combine both the individual QHPs as well as VT's SHOP enrollments due to the unique situation in that state (it's a long story). QHPs + SHOP = around 66,600 paid enrollees as of the end of July. Since BCBSVT has 65K of those (over 97%), that gives a weighted average increase of around 7.8%.
Again, the other important things to note are that 1) this is still well below the "double-digit spikes!!" that nay-sayers have been screaming about for the past year, and 2) it's also around 20% lower on average than what the insurers had originally requested (weighted average).
MONTPELIER — People who buy their health insurance through the Vermont Health Connect website are going to be seeing their rates go up.
On Tuesday, the Green Mountain Care Board authorized Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Vermont to increase its rates an average of 7.7 percent while MVP subscribers will see their rates increase 10.9 percent.
Blue Cross, the state’s largest health care insurer with about 65,000 customers enrolled through Vermont Health Connect, had requested an increase of 9.8 percent while MVP asked for 15.3 percent.
Vermont signed a revised contract with the tech firm Optum that expands its role in Vermont Health Connect’s operations.
Optum already had a contract worth $5.6 million for consulting work, and the latest deal, signed Aug. 15, is worth an additional $9.5 million for a total of $15.1 million.
...At latest count, Optum has helped the state halve its backlog of coverage changes and information errors from a high of more than 14,000 to roughly 7,000. Also, close to 4,000 people are having billing issues with Vermont Health Connect. There is some overlap between the two groups, Miller said.
One of the big news stories in 2013 and early 2014 was the botched launch of the federal Exchange (and several key state Exchanges), which led to many Americans having to wait to be enrolled in an ACA-sanctioned health plan. Although some technical snafus have been addressed, many still remain. For example, a top White House official told Congress recently that the automated system to send payments to insurance companies is still under development, and didn't offer a completion date. The lack of an electronic verification process is only one part of the "backend" of the software that is still problematic five years after the Act was passed.
I've been too busy with my day job (I do have one, you know...) to post much lately, but plenty of ACA-related news has piled up, so I'm clearing off my desk with some quick bits:
Mark Pryor shows Democrats how they should campaign on the Affordable Care Act in a red state. You don't have to mention Obamacare (which technically doesn't even exist), you don't have to even mention the Affordable Care Act. You do have to personalize what the law actually means forreal people with real medical issues which were fixed or improved by the law:
Finally, a solid update out of Vermont; thanks to Morgan True of VT Digger for pointing me towards the most recent Vermont Health Connect report as of just a week or so ago:
There's a lot going on in the table above. For one thing, this demonstrates, again, how stupid it was to hyperventilate about "How many have PAID???" back in February or March, when a good 40% or more of the people who would eventually enroll wouldn't even have their policies kick in for weeks or even months yet. Note that of those whose policies started between January 1 - May 1st, over 95% have paid their first premiums by now:
...After taking political heat for the exchange's technological failure, the appointees of Gov. John Kitzhaber are taking on a more significant role, transforming the agency for the future. At a time when critics of the agency say it should go away, it's the bureaucratic equivalent of an existential moment for an agency considered crucial to federal health reforms.
... The state's planned 2015 partnership with the federal exchange is called a "supported state-based" exchange. But it's supposed to be a temporary fix before setting up a full-fledged state-based exchange. It allows Oregon to keep insurer fees of about 2.5 percent of premiums for itself until the state resurrects its own website.
OK, the Medicaid number is a bit squirrelly since it isn't broken out by expansion/woodworkers/churn; the official number as of 4/19 was 27,268, so I'm estimating it at an even 30K.
Otherwise, the QHP total is for paid enrollees, up from 27,221, and the SHOP number is up from 33,614.
Vermont Health Connect has helped 144,500 Vermonters get health coverage. More than half, 80,400, were enrolled in Medicaid, many as a result of the program’s expansion under the Affordable Care Act.
However, the website was launched with significant problems, and eight months later it is still incomplete. State officials said this week that they will continue to rely on the two participating insurance carriers to enroll small businesses throughout the upcoming open enrollment period that begins Nov. 15. There are currently 34,800 people in that group.
There are also 29,300 people in the individual market who purchased commercial insurance. More than half, 62 percent, qualified for subsidies that lower the cost of those plans, though advocates say they are often still difficult to afford.
As I noted yesterday, there are three states which had unusually large discrepancies between the official HHS and state exchange QHP enrollments:
New York came in over 65,000 lower than the number I had for a simple reason: The New York exchange lumps enrollees in their Child Health Plus program in with QHPs, even though technically this isn't a QHP program. There were over 40,000 of these as of the end of February; this number has climbed to 65,028 as of 4/19.
Since Child Health Plus is privately funded (and therefore isn't on the Medicaid/CHIP side), but also isn't officially a QHP either according to HHS, I've moved it over to the "Off Exchange QHP" column.