Medicaid Expansion Producing State Savings and Connecting Vulnerable Groups to Care
June 15, 2016
by Jesse Cross-Call - Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Health reformfs Medicaid expansion has produced net budget savings for many
states, new data show, and states such as Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and New
Jersey expect continued net savings in coming years, even after they begin
paying a modest part of the expansionfs cost. In part, this is because the
expansion has lessened the burden on a patchwork of largely state-funded
programs that connect people who are experiencing homelessness, have substance
use disorders, or have other serious needs with critical health care
services.
Medicaid expansion is a good deal for states financially, as the federal
government pays the entire cost of covering the new Medicaid enrollees through
this year and no less than 90 percent of the cost thereafter. In expansion
states there is now less demand for targeted Medicaid programs that serve
low-income people with specific health conditions (such as certain women with
breast and cervical cancers) but are funded at the statefs regular, lower
matching rate, and for health programs that are entirely state-funded such as
mental and behavioral health programs. Expansion states also are
collecting more revenue from their existing taxes on health plans and providers,
such as the managed care plans that serve Medicaid beneficiaries in many states,
which have experienced a surge in enrollment due to expansion. The
combination of these factors has produced savings for many state budgets.
But Medicaid expansion is
about more than the impact on state budgets. It also gives states an
opportunity to provide needed care to uninsured people whose health conditions
have been a barrier to employment. And for those leaving the criminal
justice system, particularly those with mental illness or substance use
disorders, access to care can reduce recidivism. Connecting these
vulnerable populations with needed care can improve health, stabilize housing,
and support employment.
State Savings Projected to Continue
The nation has experienced historically large gains in health coverage since
health reformfs major coverage provisions took effect in 2014, and those gains
have been the greatest in the states that have expanded Medicaid.[1] Medicaid expansion has also
produced net budget savings in a diverse group of states such as California,
Colorado, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.[2]
Critics claim that these savings will be fleeting. Because enrollment
has been robust, they argue, expansion will place a burden on state budgets once
states must pay part of the cost of covering the newly eligible, starting next
year. But four statesf projections of the longer-term budgetary impact of
expansion suggest this will not necessarily be the case:
- Arkansas. The statefs gprivate optionh Medicaid
expansion will produce net state savings at least through fiscal year 2021, a
consultantfs report prepared for Governor Asa Hutchinson projects.[3] These savings
come from lower payments to hospitals for uncompensated care, lower Medicaid
costs for groups that had Medicaid before health reform but were shifted into
the new expansion group (with its higher federal matching rate), and higher
premium tax revenue due to higher enrollment in the health plans serving the
expansion population.
- Kentucky. The expansion will save Kentucky money at
least through fiscal year 2021, according to a state-commissioned
report.[4]
These savings reflect lower state spending on behavioral health programs,
lower payments to hospitals for uncompensated care, and higher tax
revenue.
- Louisiana. The expansion will take effect in
Louisiana on July 1. Even though the 100 percent federal match for
covering new enrollees will only be available for six months, the state
projects that expansion will save $677 million over the next five
years.[5]
These savings will come partly from lower payments to hospitals for
uncompensated care and from higher revenue from the statefs tax on Medicaid
managed care plans.
- New Jersey. The expansion will produce net savings
of $353 million this fiscal year and $355 million next year, New Jersey
estimates.[6] These savings reflect lower payments to
hospitals for uncompensated care, higher revenue from the statefs tax on
health plans serving Medicaid beneficiaries, and lower Medicaid costs for
groups covered under a pre-health reform waiver that were shifted into the new
expansion group.
In each of these states, the projected net savings take into account the
costs of expansion, such as state matching costs that begin next year, higher
administrative costs, and higher enrollment among people eligible for Medicaid
under pre-health reform eligibility rules (who are covered at the regular
federal Medicaid matching rate).
Connecting Vulnerable Populations With Needed Care
The Medicaid expansion does more than save states money; it also enables them
to help vulnerable populations get needed care and achieve better health
outcomes.
Before health reform, only one-fifth of low-income workers had coverage
through their employer, and coverage in the individual insurance market was
prohibitively expensive for most people, assuming they could obtain coverage at
all.[7]
Medicaid coverage was not an option for many poor adults; the typical state cut
off Medicaid eligibility at 61 percent of the poverty line for working parents
and at 37 percent of poverty for parents who were not employed. Moreover,
except in a handful of states with federal waivers, non-elderly adults without
children could not qualify for Medicaid at all, irrespective of income. By
raising eligibility for non-elderly adults up to 138 percent of the poverty line
(about $16,400 for an individual and $27,800 for a family of three in 2016),
health reformfs Medicaid expansion makes coverage available to a group that was
largely denied coverage options available to other Americans.
Critics warned that new enrollees would swamp emergency rooms for basic
health care and, by getting this care in the costliest setting, drive up statesf
overall health costs. Yet data from the expansionfs first few years show
this is not the case; newly eligible enrollees are seeing primary care doctors
and obtaining a variety of preventive services. For example, tens of
thousands of new enrollees in Kentucky have received cholesterol, diabetes, and
cancer screenings and preventive dental services.[8] Similarly, a survey of low-income non-elderly
adults in three states found that the share of residents with a primary care
physician rose by 8 percentage points more in the expansion states
(Arkansas and Kentucky) than in the non-expansion state (Texas).[9]
The Medicaid expansion holds particular promise for people with mental health
and substance use disorders. Typically, these individuals lack a
consistent source of health coverage, instead receiving a patchwork of services
through state and local behavioral health programs with limited capacity to meet
the demand for care. As a result, they often cannot access basic care such
as screenings, assessments, behavioral health treatment, and prescription drugs,
which in turn makes it more difficult to manage their conditions.
States are using the Medicaid expansion to better target care to the
following populations:
-
People with behavioral health conditions. An
estimated 20 percent of non-elderly adults had a mental illness in the past
year, and 10 percent had a substance use disorder.[10] These conditions are more prevalent among
people with low incomes and often go untreated in people who are
uninsured. For example, a low-income person with a serious mental
illness is 30 percent more likely to get treatment if enrolled in Medicaid
than otherwise.[11]
This population has been left behind in states that have not expanded
Medicaid; 1.9 million low-income people with a mental health or substance use
disorder remain uninsured because their state has not expanded.[12] States that have
expanded are saving money in their behavioral health programs because
federal dollars are paying for a greater share of services. For example,
Michigan saved $190 million in fiscal year 2015 after enrollees in a
state-funded program providing services to people with mental illnesses were
transitioned into Medicaid. Kentucky saved $30 million in its state
mental and behavioral health programs in the first 18 months of
expansion.[13] Importantly, states can reinvest some or
all of these savings to bolster their state-run programs.
-
People experiencing homelessness. Individuals
experiencing homelessness often suffer from serious physical and mental health
conditions such as a substance use disorder, depression, or
schizophrenia. Before health reform, individuals experiencing
homelessness obtained care from a variety of sources, including state and
local health programs. While some states provided Medicaid coverage to
some low-income adults, three-quarters of homeless adults eligible for
coverage were not enrolled.[14]
A study examining Health Care for the Homeless projects around the country
found that in 2014, coverage among their patients rose 22 percentage points in
expansion states (from 45 percent to 67 percent) but just 4 percentage points
in non-expansion states (from 26 percent to 30 percent).[15] Providing health coverage
to the homeless likely results in better access to care, as well as better
financial stability for the clinics and providers serving this vulnerable
population.
The Medicaid expansion is also a critical piece of supportive housing
efforts, which pair affordable housing with coordinated services that better
equip people to maintain a stable home. States can offer, through
Medicaid, personal care services in homes, intensive case management, and help
searching for housing and working with landlords if these services help
recipients maintain their health and keep them out of more expensive
institutional care. Yet many states do not use this flexibility.
And by boosting Medicaidfs role in supportive housing, states can reinvest
potential savings in such areas as providing rental assistance to more people
in need of it.[16]
-
Incarcerated individuals. People in prisons or jails
are more likely to have serious health care needs, such as HIV/AIDS, mental or
behavioral health issues, or a substance use disorder. Under federal
law, the only services Medicaid will cover when someone is incarcerated are
those provided during an inpatient stay at a hospital. For this reason,
many states terminate Medicaid eligibility when people become incarcerated,
with the result that people are uninsured when they leave prison or
jail.
Various states are now taking either or both of two approaches to help
ensure that people have access to health care upon their release.
Indiana and New Mexico have recognized that suspending (rather than
terminating) Medicaid coverage, which allows the state to resume Medicaid
coverage on the day people leave prison or jail, makes it easier for them to
get care when released and will likely produce state savings down the
road. Arizona and Washington, among other states, allow people to apply
for Medicaid coverage before their release so that coverage can begin
immediately upon release.[17]
People with health coverage when they are released are more likely to receive
care for complex medical conditions, which lowers their chances of recidivism
— thereby reducing corrections spending — and increases their chances of
gaining and maintaining employment.
Conclusion
States that have expanded Medicaid have experienced larger gains in health
coverage than non-expansion states. Moreover, many states have experienced
net budget savings due to expansion. In addition, the Medicaid expansion
is connecting low-income adults — most of whom lacked access to comprehensive
health coverage before health reform — with needed care. Many of these
individuals have serious physical and behavioral health needs, and Medicaid
coverage has allowed them to get care for substance use disorders, mental
illness, and a range of other conditions, which can not only improve their
health but also support employment and reduce recidivism for many vulnerable
individuals.