Employer self-insurance decisions and the implications of the patient protection and Affordable Care Act as modified by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (ACA)

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (ACA) changes the regulatory environment within which health insurance policies on the small-group market are bought and sold. New regulations include rate bands that limit premium price variation, risk-adjustment policies that will transfer funds from low-actuarial-risk to high-actuarial-risk plans, and requirements that plans include “essential health benefits.” While the new regulations will be applied to all non-grandfathered fully insured policies purchased by businesses with 100 or fewer workers, self-insured plans are exempt from these regulations. As a result, some firms may have a stronger incentive to offer self-insured plans after the ACA takes full effect. In this article we identify factors that influence employers’ decisions to self-insure and estimate how the ACA will influence self-insurance rates. We also consider the implications of higher self-insurance rates for adverse selection in the non-self-insured small-group market and whether enrollees in self-insured plans receive different benefits than enrollees in fully-insured plans. Results are based on data analysis, literature review, findings from discussions with stakeholders, and microsimulation analysis using the COMPARE model. Overall, we find little evidence that self-insured plans differ systematically from fully insured plans in terms of benefit generosity, price, or claims denial rates. Stakeholders expressed significant concern about adverse selection in the health insurance exchanges due to regulatory exemptions for self-insured plans. However, our microsimulation analysis predicts a sizable increase in self-insurance only if comprehensive stop-loss policies become widely available after the ACA takes full effect and the expected cost of self-insuring with stop-loss is comparable to the cost of being fully insured in a market without rating regulations. This article is a shorter version of a technical report published by Rand Corporation in 2011 (https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR971.html

The Science of Gun Policy: A Critical Synthesis of Research Evidence on the Effects of Gun Policies in the United States, Second Edition

In this report, part of the RAND Corporation's Gun Policy in America initiative, researchers seek objective information about what the scientific literature reveals about the likely effects of various gun laws. In this second edition of an earlier work, the authors add five gun policies to the 13 examined in the original analysis and expand the study time frame to incorporate a larger body of research. With those adjustments, the authors synthesize the available scientific data on the effects of 18 policies on firearm deaths, violent crime, the gun industry, defensive gun use, and other outcomes. By highlighting where scientific evidence is accumulating, the authors hope to build consensus around a shared set of facts that have been established through a transparent, nonpartisan, and impartial review process. In so doing, they also illuminate areas where more and better information could make important contributions to establishing fair and effective gun policies

The Changing Landscape of Hospital Capacity in Large Cities and Suburbs: Implications for the Safety Net in Metropolitan America

An analysis of trends in hospital use and capacity by ownership status and community poverty levels for large urban and suburban areas was undertaken to examine changes that may have important implications for the future of the hospital safety net in large metropolitan areas. Using data on general acute care hospitals located in the 100 largest cities and their suburbs for the years 1996, 1999, and 2002, we examined a number of measures of use and capacity, including staffed beds, admissions, outpatient and emergency department visits, trauma centers, and positron emission tomography scanners. Over the 6-year period, the number of for-profit, nonprofit, and public hospitals declined in both cities and suburbs, with public hospitals showing the largest percentage of decreases. By 2002, for-profit hospitals were responsible for more Medicaid admissions than public hospitals for the 100 largest cities combined. Public hospitals, however, maintained the longest Medicaid average length of stay. The proportion of urban hospital resources located in high poverty cities was slightly higher than the proportion of urban population living in high poverty cities. However, the results demonstrate for the first time, a highly disproportionate share of hospital resources and use among suburbs with a low poverty rate compared to suburbs with a high poverty rate. High poverty communities represented the greatest proportion of suburban population in 2000 but had the smallest proportion of hospital use and specialty care capacity, whereas the opposite was true of low poverty suburbs. The results raise questions about the effects of the expanding role of private hospitals as safety net providers, and have implications for poor residents in high poverty suburban areas, and for urban safety net hospitals that care for poor suburban residents in surrounding communities