TY - JOUR
T1 - Implementation Of New Mexico’s ‘No Behavioral Health Cost Sharing’ Law
T2 - A Qualitative Study
AU - Harris, Samantha J.
AU - Golberstein, Ezra
AU - Maclean, Johanna Catherine
AU - Stein, Bradley D.
AU - Ettner, Susan L.
AU - Saloner, Brendan
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.
PY - 2024/10
Y1 - 2024/10
N2 - Out-of-pocket spending is a long-standing challenge for privately insured people. New Mexico passed the first US law prohibiting private insurers from applying cost sharing to behavioral health treatment, effective January 1, 2022. We examined the perceptions of key informants, including clinicians, insurers, and state officials, about implementing the No Behavioral Health Cost Sharing law to explore how it might affect downstream outcomes such as spending and access. The law was viewed favorably and implemented without much difficulty. Clinicians noted widespread positive impacts, particularly for those needing intensive treatment. However, they worried about workforce capacity and the exclusion of people covered under self-insured employer plans, which are exempt from state regulation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) of 1974. Insurers found the law to be in alignment with their organizational goals, but they expressed concern about the administrative burden caused by increased reviews of claims, and some were monitoring for unintended consequences (for example, waste and fraud) that could lead to increased premiums. Engagement strategies were needed to inform eligible members and facilitate enrollment in eligible plans. The law provides a potential model for states to improve access to behavioral health care, but impacts may be limited by factors such as workforce, awareness, and federal ERISA constraints.
AB - Out-of-pocket spending is a long-standing challenge for privately insured people. New Mexico passed the first US law prohibiting private insurers from applying cost sharing to behavioral health treatment, effective January 1, 2022. We examined the perceptions of key informants, including clinicians, insurers, and state officials, about implementing the No Behavioral Health Cost Sharing law to explore how it might affect downstream outcomes such as spending and access. The law was viewed favorably and implemented without much difficulty. Clinicians noted widespread positive impacts, particularly for those needing intensive treatment. However, they worried about workforce capacity and the exclusion of people covered under self-insured employer plans, which are exempt from state regulation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) of 1974. Insurers found the law to be in alignment with their organizational goals, but they expressed concern about the administrative burden caused by increased reviews of claims, and some were monitoring for unintended consequences (for example, waste and fraud) that could lead to increased premiums. Engagement strategies were needed to inform eligible members and facilitate enrollment in eligible plans. The law provides a potential model for states to improve access to behavioral health care, but impacts may be limited by factors such as workforce, awareness, and federal ERISA constraints.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85205825619&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85205825619&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1377/hlthaff.2024.00101
DO - 10.1377/hlthaff.2024.00101
M3 - Article
C2 - 39374463
AN - SCOPUS:85205825619
SN - 0278-2715
VL - 43
SP - 1448
EP - 1454
JO - Health Affairs
JF - Health Affairs
IS - 10
ER -