Colorado Health Insurance Insider

No-cost broker assistance.

You are here: Home / Archives for Individual/Family Health

Individual/Family Health

HHS Allowing States To Define Essential Benefits In The Exchanges

By

[…] Colorado already has a comprehensive small group benefits mandate. Until this year, one of the most glaring differences between small group and individual plans was that individual policies in Colorado were not required to cover maternity. But that changed in January when all new and renewing individual policies had to begin covering maternity. I would say that the primary difference now between most of the individual plans and small group plans in Colorado is that the small group policies are guaranteed issue, whereas the individual plans are medically underwritten. But in 2014, when the exchanges get underway, the individual policies will be guaranteed issue too. Individual policies are still quite a bit less expensive than group policies in Colorado, but I wonder if that will change too once the exchanges get underway? It would seem so, since the benefits and underwriting will be virtually identical.

The small group market in Colorado is already quite structured by state mandates. The individual market also has quite a few mandates, including the new maternity benefit mandate. But it appears that the individual policies that are sold in the exchanges beginning in 2014 will have benefits at least as comprehensive as the benefits offered by the largest small group plans in Colorado. That means that “bottom of the heap” individual plans (ie, the ones with tons of fine print and huge holes in their coverage) probably won’t be making an appearance in the exchange, or at least not without a serious overhaul. […]

Colorado Child-Only Open Enrollment Details For January 2012

By

The next open enrollment for child-only policies is almost here, so I thought it might be helpful to provide some specific details in terms of what policies are available and what parents should expect when submitting child-only applications next month.

The first open enrollment window in 2012 will be the month of January. Applications for child-only policies have to be submitted between January 1 and January 31. Application not submitted by the end of January will have to wait and re-submit in July, which is the second open-enrollment period of the year. For most carriers, each child in a family will have to have a separate application.

All eligible child-only applications submitted during the open enrollment period are guaranteed issue, so the child cannot be refused coverage. However, the applications are still medically underwritten and the rate can be increased by up to 200% based on the child’s medical history (so if the standard price is $100, the policy could actually be assigned a rate of $300, which is equal to a 200% rate increase).

Colorado Senate Bill 128 requires all Colorado health insurance carriers that offer coverage for adults to also offer child-only plans during the two annual open enrollment windows. But the bill does not require carriers to provide guaranteed issue coverage for children who are eligible for health insurance from another source (other than a high risk pool like CoverColorado or GettingUSCovered – see the bottom of page 4).

Most Colorado carriers have selected one or two plan designs that will be available for child-only applications next month. To give you an idea of what is available in Colorado for child-only coverage, we’re providing information here regarding child-only options from six of the top individual health insurance carriers in the state. […]

Access To A Mini-Med Group Plan Does Not Prevent CoverColorado Enrollment

By

[…] The person I spoke with at CoverColorado checked with a supervisor and then told me that mini-meds are an exception to CoverColorado’s rule banning eligibility for people who have access to group health insurance. In order to qualify, the applicant has to provide the usual proof of eligibility along with proof that their employer’s group health plan is a mini-med. This can be the declarations page from the policy or marketing materials for the plan (which now have to include language indicating that the plan has been granted a waiver by HHS and does not meet the minimum benefit requirements defined by the PPACA).

Hopefully this will clarify things for others in a similar situation. Normally, access to a group health insurance policy (even if it’s one you don’t like or your doctor isn’t on the network, etc.) makes a person ineligible for CoverColorado. But if that group plan happens to be a mini-med and you also meet the other eligibility criteria for CoverColorado, you can submit an application to CoverColorado.

CoverColorado Assessment For 2012

By

[…] As the cost of healthcare continues to rise, CoverColorado – just like every other insurer – needs more and more money to cover the cost of claims. Their website shows the fees that have been assessed over the past few years, and the increased fee that will go into effect next month for 2012.

Because the CoverColorado assessment is collected by health insurance carriers and passed on to CoverColorado, the fee is added to each policy’s premium every month. The end result is that we all pay a few dollars more per month than the actual cost of our policy. This can be confusing, especially if people are new to individual health insurance and haven’t had experience with paying their own health insurance premiums in the past. The amount that is going to be drafted from your bank account or billed to you will be a few dollars higher than your stated premiums because it includes the CoverColorado assessment. […]

Will Large Groups Encourage Sick Employees To Seek Coverage In The Exchanges?

By

[…] Amy Monahan suggested that there could be a law making employees ineligible for coverage in the exchanges if they are eligible for employer group coverage. Or there’s the possibility of a law similar to the one that Colorado designed to protect the state’s high risk pool from a similar scenario – employers here can’t reimburse employees for individual health insurance premiums if they have had a group plan in place within the past twelve months (in the case of the exchanges, they could make employees ineligible for coverage in the exchanges for at least a year after leaving a group plan, assuming they are still eligible for coverage under the group plan and have just opted out). Either option would help to protect the exchanges, but they don’t do much to prevent employers from structuring their health insurance policies to make healthcare significantly more expensive for the sickest employees. […]
A lot of this remains to be seen. The health care reform law still has to be reviewed by the Supreme Court, and we have a major election cycle next year and another full legislative year after that. But if everything about the PPACA remains as it is now, lawmakers will eventually have to address the possibility of self-insured employers designing health insurance plans that encourage their sickest employees to opt for coverage in the exchanges instead.

Consumer-Driven Healthcare Debate

By

[…]prior to reading Ungar’s article I wasn’t aware of the agreement between the Independent Physicians Association and Rocky Mountain Health Plans with regard to Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement. The doctors in the IPA were so determined to treat every patient equally that they worked out an arrangement with RMHP to have the insurance carrier accept payment directly from Medicare and Medicaid and then pool that money together with premiums collected from RMHP insureds.
[…] Hixon argues that patients with more financial responsibility for their own care do indeed make better decisions regarding efficient use of healthcare dollars. Furthermore, he cites a study that found that patients with high deductible health insurance policies (eg, HSA qualified plans) had more preventive care, lower rates of hospitalization, and were more compliant in terms of following their doctors’ recommendations. They were also more likely to question their medical bills and had overall lower medical costs than people with traditional low-deductible policies.

[…] In addition to probably being above average in terms of financial savvy, I would assume that the demographic that opts for high deductible health insurance is also probably healthier than average. It makes sense that the more health problems a person has, the more likely he’ll be to choose a lower-deductible policy, since he knows he’s likely to be using the policy at least somewhat regularly. On the other hand, a person with no health conditions at all is probably making a good gamble to select a high deductible policy, since there’s a decent chance he’ll be able to go for several years without having a major claim. So the fact that people with HDHPs have lower medical costs isn’t really surprising. It’s largely a self-selected group (employers who offer an HDHP usually offer another plan as well, and everyone shopping for individual health insurance who picks an HDHP has other options from which to choose). I’m not sure that medical costs would still be lower for people with HDHPs if they policy designs were assigned randomly across the entire population.

Access To Healthcare In Colorado Worsening

By

The Colorado Health Access Survey results were released earlier this month, and the results aren’t particularly surprising given the state of the economy for the past few years. The total number of uninsured Colorado residents is now 829,000 – up from 678,000 in 2009. The survey also counts the number of “underinsured” residents (those who aren’t able to afford their out-of-pocket expenses that total more than 10% of their income, or 5% for those below the poverty line). The two categories – uninsured and underinsured – amount to 1.5 million people, which is about a third of the Colorado population.

The 22% increase in the number of uninsured residents came despite strong efforts in Colorado to expand access to Medicaid and CHP+ over the past few years. Without the expansion of those programs, the numbers would undoubtedly be even more bleak. […]

Employer Funding Of Individual Health Insurance Varies By State

By

Over the past several months, I’ve written a few articles about the legality of employer reimbursement of individual health insurance premiums in Colorado. Our friend and fellow blogger Hank Stern (writing at InsureBlog) found the changes interesting, and noted that the laws surrounding employer reimbursement of premiums vary quite a bit from one state to another (he’s in OH).

Hank and I wrote a joint post about the topic, which he published last week on InsureBlog. Here’s Hank’s description of how the law works in OH (regular readers will note that it’s similar to how things used to be here in Colorado, before HRAs became a major issue, and of course before SB19 passed earlier this year). […]

Being A Savvy Healthcare Consumer Is Tougher Than It Sounds

By

[…] I’ve long been a fan of high deductible, HSA qualified health insurance policies (our family had one until very recently when we switched to a high deductible plan that isn’t HSA qualified but has much lower premiums). But I’ve also always been aware that we’re fortunate to be able to utilize a high deductible health insurance policy – both in terms of being healthy and not needing much in the way of healthcare, and also in our ability to make contributions to our HSA to cover the cost of care we might need in the future. People who have serious health conditions and/or those with very limited funds […] When it comes to actually being a savvy consumer of healthcare, the vast majority of us wouldn’t even know where to begin. Google? Asking friends? Maybe, but chances are, we’re going to go to a doctor and follow (at least roughly) the recommendations the doctor makes. Most of the time, providers are the ones who control how much care a patient receives ie, it’s the supply that’s driving things, rather than the demand. We might know that something’s not right and take the initial step of going to the doctor. But what happens next (surgery? PT? wait and see? Medication? etc.) is generally up to the doctor. As Michelle pointed out, the patient’s number one priority is going to be getting better, especially if the problem being treated is a serious one. Shopping around for the best price and poring over comparative effectiveness research data probably isn’t going to be high on most patients’ lists.

More Flexibility With An Individual Health Insurance Plan

By

[…] For the average person who has had an individual policy for a decade and is late 50s-ish, keeping that individual policy (even though a group plan may become available) might be the ticket to being able to have some flexibility in terms of when to retire. The group plan is guaranteed issue – health conditions won’t be a barrier to getting coverage. But the group plan is also tied to the current employer, and the policy will only be available for a maximum of 18 months after you leave that job (via COBRA). […] Linda’s article is an excellent reminder about the importance of looking at the specifics of your own situation – including long term issues that might outweigh short-term benefits – rather than following conventional wisdom or doing what everyone else is doing.

Colorado’s Average 2012 Premium Increase Is The Smallest Since 2000

By

[…] I’m sure there will still be people who falsely claim that Colorado’s maternity mandate and federal reform are the reason for any increase. But when we place the 2012 increase in context with the increases we’ve seen over the past decade, it becomes harder to blame recent reform laws for the 2012 premium increases. I’m glad to see that after a year of having guaranteed issue coverage for children, no lifetime maximums, more comprehensive preventive care, and maternity benefits on all new and renewed individual policies, we are seeing the lowest average rate increase in over a decade.

Employer Reimbursement Of Premiums Causing Applicants To Be Declined

By

[…] I know that the law was written with good intentions, but we’re noticing that it’s the employees – the applicants who are trying to get individual health insurance policies – who get the short end of the stick. It’s the employees who end up getting their health insurance application declined. It’s the employees who end up having to pay for their own premiums in order to obtain coverage, even if they thought that they were going to be able to rely on some level of reimbursement from their employer.

Comparative Effectiveness Research Fee To Be Added To Premiums In 2012

By

[…] This fee is similar to the one that is assessed to pay for CoverColorado (except that it’s a much smaller amount). Basically, carriers will collect the fee from members and then pass the money on to the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, much the way carriers pass on the CoverColorado fee. The fee will not be counted as premiums for the purpose of calculating medical loss ratio numbers, and should not be confused as being part of the premium that we pay for our health insurance.

Possible Solutions For Long Term Care Funding Problems

By

[…] As long as we’re looking at a fragmented public/private hodge podge of long term care funding that includes Medicaid, private long term care insurance, private assets, and help from family and friends, I think it’s important that we look for ways to make things as fair as possible and also keep Medicaid financially afloat. The CLASS Act got nixed from the ACA, but the problem of funding long term care isn’t going away, and is only going to grow as the baby boomer generation ages. John’s article is a good one to read if you’re interested in possible solutions.

World Insurance And American Republic Leaving Individual Market

By

[…] The rep I spoke with at World Insurance said that it wasn’t clear yet which states will be in the November round of notifications, so we aren’t sure when World/American Republic policyholders in Colorado will be officially notified that their carrier is leaving the market. But I confirmed with both World Insurance and Celtic that the change is happening and that the initial stage of it will begin next month. Colorado residents who are currently covered by either World Insurance or American Republic would be wise to begin looking for other health insurance options. […]

Health Insurance Exchange Payroll and Admin Expenses

By

[…] One of the comments on the post was from Dede de Percin, the Executive Director of the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative (CCHI). […] Dede’s comment on my article referenced the point I made about consumers not having to pay additional fees to have a broker. Basically, health insurance is priced the same whether you go directly through a health insurance carrier (calling Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield directly, for example) or through a broker (who will compare options from multiple carriers for you). Dede made this point:
“While a consumer or business doesn’t not pay a health insurance broker directly, broker fees and commissions are paid by the insurance companies – and rolled into […]”

Conflicting Data Regarding Medical Costs

By

[…] These numbers are much more in line with the rise in health insurance premiums that we’ve seen over the past few years. I have no explanation for why the data from the two sources is so dramatically different in terms of medical trend in 2010, but if the trend was really closer to 7.5% rather than 1.7%, the health insurance premium increases would be a lot easier to understand. […] In addition to the MLR rules, some states (including Colorado) have implemented strict review processes for rate hikes. The ACA now calls for insurers who propose a rate hike of 10% or more […]

Stuck In A Mini-Med

By

[…] So he applied for an individual policy with Anthem Blue Cross for his family, and was approved. But then when he tried to cancel his mini-med plan, his employer told him that he couldn’t cancel it until the open enrollment period next April. It would seem that trapping enrollees into a year-long contract with a mini-med plan is not in line with the spirit of the HHS guidelines that call for full disclosure regarding the waivers and directives to steer enrollees towards healthcare dot gov if they are interested in getting a policy that does comply with the ACA rules regarding annual policy limits. […]

A Great Cavalcade And Some Good Advice About Life Insurance

By

[…] a good one for people considering such a product – or really, most any very specific life insurance policy that only covers a particular debt, like your car loan, mortgage, or credit card balance. A regular term life insurance policy will likely be a much better value and can be used by your dependents to pay off whatever debts you may have and cover their own cost of living.

Decline And Rate Up Statistics – Interesting But Confusing

By

[…] Your policy will cost the same amount regardless of whether you use a broker, but an experienced broker will be able to help you make sense of the plan comparison information, including the underwriting statistics. A policy or carrier’s statistical likelihood of declining or rating up any one application isn’t really relevant to each specific client… what is relevant however, is each carrier’s underwriting guidelines for the particular pre-existing condition the applicant has. […]

Colorado DOI Improving Transparency Of Rate Review Process

By

[…] This should help boost public participation in the rate review discussion, and add to the general understanding of how the rate review process works. The DOI is obviously working hard to create as much transparency as possible with regards to rate increases. Rates will continue to increase as long as the cost of health care continues to climb (and as long as we continue to increase our utilization of health care) but at least the logic behind the rate increases will be more clear.

Seeking Certainty

By

[…] And finally, if the Supreme Court is going to hand down a ruling like the one we got from the Appeals Court last week, we need to know that as soon as possible too. If the individual mandate does indeed end up being tossed out, the health care reform law will need an awful lot of compromises and revisions in order to make it tenable. Perhaps I’m being overly pessimistic, but given the level of compromise we’ve seen from the political system over the last decade or so, I have a hard time seeing how the PPACA could go on with one of its major provisions deleted. […]

Standardized Policy Descriptions Coming Soon

By

The Colorado Health Plan Description Form isn’t exactly the same as the forms that HHS will require carriers to make available next year, but it’s similar in many ways, and carriers in Colorado have been issuing these standardized plan summaries for nearly 14 years. As well as outlining the coverage provided, the new forms will include “coverage examples” that will show potential customers how the plan would cover three common medical scenarios: breast cancer, maternity care, and diabetes. […]

August Open Enrollment Period For Child Only Policies In Colorado

By

For parents looking for child-only policies in Colorado, we are in the middle of the 2011 open enrollment period, which will end August 31st. All carriers that offer individual health insurance policies for adults must also offer (during open enrollment periods only) at least one plan option for a child applying without an adult on the policy. This is pursuant to Colorado Senate Bill 128, which was signed into law earlier this year. Following the passage of SB128, the Colorado Division of Insurance stepped in to clarify the issue with emergency regulation E-11-03, which has specific details about the implementation of the law. […]

More On Health Insurance Exchanges

By

[…] We need exchanges that are easy to navigate, accessible for people who are not fluent in English, and that provide seamless access to the subsidies that the PPACA provides to help people afford health insurance. I’ve already pointed out that we’re going to have to walk a fine line in terms of keeping things fair for both insureds and insurers, in order to attract as many enrollees and high quality insurers as possible to the exchanges. […]