Why Are the Health Insurance Marketplaces Thriving in Some States but Struggling in Others?

Issue: In 2017, health insurance marketplaces in some states were thriving, while those in other states were struggling. What explains these differences? Goal: Identify factors that explain differences in issuers' participation levels in state insurance marketplaces. Methods: Analysis of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's HIX Compare dataset, and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners' 2010 Supplemental Health Care Exhibit Report. Findings and Conclusions: State policies and insurance regulations were key factors affecting the number of issuers participating in the marketplaces in 2017. Marketplaces run by states had more issuers than states that rely on the federally facilitated marketplace. States with fewer than four issuers tended to have policies in place that could have been destabilizing--for example, permitting the sale of plans not compliant with the Affordable Care Act's requirements regarding essential health benefits or guaranteed issue. Consumers in states that did not take steps to enforce these insurance market reforms still benefited from their protections, however; they were just enforced at the federal level. States with more issuers were also more likely to have expanded Medicaid. States with fewer issuers tended to be rural and have smaller populations, more concentrated hospital markets, and lower physician-to-population ratios.

Consumers Buy Lower-Cost Plans On Covered California, Suggesting Exposure To Premium Increases Is Less Than Commonly Reported.

With the notable exception of California, states have not made enrollment data for their Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace plans publicly available. Researchers thus have tracked premium trends by calculating changes in the average price for plans offered (a straight average across plans) rather than for plans purchased (a weighted average). Using publicly available enrollment data for Covered California, we found that the average purchased price for all plans was 11.6 percent less than the average offered price in 2014, 13.2 percent less in 2015, and 15.2 percent less in 2016. Premium growth measured by plans purchased was roughly 2 percentage points less than when measured by plans offered in 2014-15 and 2015-16. We observed shifts in consumer choices toward less costly plans, both between and within tiers, and we estimate that a $100 increase in a plan's net annual premium reduces its probability of selection. These findings suggest that the Marketplaces are helping consumers moderate premium cost growth.

The ACA's Cost-Sharing Reduction Plans: A Key to Affordable Health Coverage for Millions of U.S. Workers.

Issue: Without the cost-sharing reductions (CSRs) made available by the Affordable Care Act, health plans sold in the marketplaces may be unaffordable for many low-income people. CSRs are available to households earning between 100 percent and 250 percent of the federal poverty level that choose a silver-level marketplace plan. In 2016, about 7 million people received cost-sharing reductions that substantially lowered their deductibles, copayments, coinsurance, and out-of-pocket limits. Goal: To examine variations in consumer cost-sharing reductions between silver-level plans with CSRs to traditional marketplace plans and to employer-based insurance. Methods: Data analysis of 1,209 CSR-eligible plans sold in individual marketplaces in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. Key findings and conclusions: Cost-sharing amounts in silver plans with CSRs are much less than those in non-CSR base silver plans; silver plans with CSRs generally offer far better financial protection than those without. General annual deductibles range from $246 for CSR silver plans with a platinum-level actuarial value (94%) to as much as $3,063 for non-CSR silver plans. Out-of-pocket limits vary from $6,223 in base silver plans to $1,102 in silver plans with CSRs and a platinum-level actuarial level.

Changes in Consumer Cost-Sharing for Health Plans Sold in the ACA's Insurance Marketplaces, 2015 to 2016.

This brief examines changes in consumer health plan cost-sharing--deductibles, copayments, coinsurance, and out-of-pocket limits--for coverage offered in the Affordable Care Act's marketplaces between 2015 and 2016. Three of seven measures studied rose moderately in 2016, an increase attributable in part to a shift in the mix of plans offered in the marketplaces, from plans with higher actuarial value (platinum and gold plans) to those that have less generous coverage (bronze and silver plans). Nearly 60 percent of enrollees in marketplace plans receive cost-sharing reductions as part of income-based assistance. For enrollees without cost-sharing reductions, average copayments, deductibles, and out-of-pocket limits remain considerably higher under bronze and silver plans than under employer-based plans; cost-sharing is similar in gold plans and employer plans. Marketplace plans are more likely than employer-based plans to impose a deductible for prescription drugs but no less likely to do so for primary care visits.

In Second Year Of Marketplaces, New Entrants, ACA 'Co-Ops,' And Medicaid Plans Restrain Average Premium Growth Rates.

Premiums for health insurance plans offered through the federally facilitated and state-based Marketplaces remained steady or increased only modestly from 2014 to 2015. We used data from the Marketplaces, state insurance departments, and insurer websites to examine patterns of premium pricing and the factors behind these patterns. Our data came from 2,964 unique plans offered in 2014 and 4,153 unique plans offered in 2015 in forty-nine states and the District of Columbia. Using descriptive and multivariate analysis, we found that the addition of a carrier in a rating area lowered average premiums for the two lowest-cost silver plans and the lowest-cost bronze plan by 2.2 percent. When all plans in a rating area were included, an additional carrier was associated with an average decline in premiums of 1.4 percent. Plans in the Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan Program and Medicaid managed care plans had lower premiums and average premium increases than national commercial and Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans. On average, premiums fell by an appreciably larger amount for catastrophic and bronze plans than for gold plans, and premiums for platinum plans increased. This trend of low premium increases overall is unlikely to continue, however, as insurers are faced with mounting medical claims.

An Early Look At SHOP Marketplaces: Low Premiums, Adequate Plan Choice In Many, But Not All, States.

The Affordable Care Act created the Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) Marketplaces to help small businesses provide health insurance to their employees. To attract the participation of substantial numbers of small employers, SHOP Marketplaces must demonstrate value-added features unavailable in the traditional small-group market. Such features could include lower premiums than those for plans offered outside the Marketplace and more extensive choices of carriers and plans. More choices are necessary for SHOP Marketplaces to offer the "employee choice model," in which employees may choose from many carriers and plans. This study compared the numbers of carriers and plans and premium levels in 2014 for plans offered through SHOP Marketplaces with those of plans offered only outside of the Marketplaces. An average of 4.3 carriers participated in each state's Marketplace, offering a total of forty-seven plans. Premiums for plans offered through SHOP Marketplaces were, on average, 7 percent less than those in the same metal tier offered only outside of the Marketplaces. Lower premiums and the participation of multiple carriers in most states are a source of optimism for future enrollment growth in SHOP Marketplaces. Lack of broker buy-in in many states and burdensome enrollment processes are major impediments to success.

Collectively bargained health plans: more comprehensive, less cost sharing than employer plans.

National statistics on the cost and provisions of collectively bargained health plans show them to have similar single premiums, but lower family premiums, compared to employer-based plans not subject to collective bargaining. Union members contribute 4 percent and 6 percent of the cost of their premiums for single and family coverage, respectively, versus 18 percent and 29 percent for workers in employer-based plans. Cost sharing in collectively bargained plans is considerably less than in employer-based plans; coverage for prescription drugs is similar.

Consumer Cost-Sharing in Marketplace vs. Employer Health Insurance Plans, 2015.

Using data from 49 states and Washington, D.C., we analyzed changes in cost-sharing under health plans offered to individuals and families through state and federal exchanges from 2014 to 2015. We examined eight vehicles for cost-sharing, including deductibles, copayments, coinsurance, and out-of-pocket limits, and compared findings with cost-sharing under employer-based insurance. We found cost-sharing under marketplace plans remained essentially unchanged from 2014 to 2015. Stable premiums during that period do not reflect greater costs borne by enrollees. Further, 56 percent of enrollees in marketplace plans attained cost-sharing reductions in 2015. However, for people without cost-sharing reductions, average copayments, deductibles, and out-of-pocket limits under catastrophic, bronze, and silver plans are considerably higher than under employer-based plans on average, while cost-sharing under gold plans is similar employer-based plans on average. Marketplace plans are far more likely than employer-based plans to require enrollees to meet deductibles before they receive coverage for prescription drugs.

Small employer perspectives on the Affordable Care Act's premiums, SHOP exchanges, and self-insurance.

Beginning January 1, 2014, small businesses having no more than fifty full-time-equivalent workers will be able to obtain health insurance for their employees through Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) exchanges in every state. Although the Affordable Care Act intended the exchanges to make the purchasing of insurance more attractive and affordable to small businesses, it is not yet known how they will respond to the exchanges. Based on a telephone survey of 604 randomly selected private firms having 3-50 employees, we found that both firms that offered health coverage and those that did not rated most features of SHOP exchanges highly but were also very price sensitive. More than 92 percent of nonoffering small firms said that if they were to offer coverage, it would be "very" or "somewhat" important to them that premium costs be less than they are today. Eighty percent of offering firms use brokers who commonly perform functions of benefit managers--functions that the SHOP exchanges may assume. Twenty-six percent of firms using brokers reported discussing self-insuring with their brokers. An increase in the number of self-insured small employers could pose a threat to SHOP exchanges and other small-group insurance reforms.