Category: From California Healthline.org

Private Medicaid health plans lost millions of members in the past year as pandemic protections that prohibited states from dropping anyone from the government program expired.

But despite Medicaid’s unwinding, as it’s known, at least two of the five largest publicly traded companies selling plans have continued to increase revenue from the program, according to their latest earnings reports.

“It’s a very interesting paradox,” said Andy Schneider, a research professor at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy, of plans’ Medicaid revenue increasing despite enrollment drops.

Medicaid, the state-federal health program for low-income and disabled people, is administered by states. But most people enrolled in the program get their health care through insurers contracted by states, including UnitedHealthcare, Centene, and Molina.

The companies persuaded states to pay them more money per Medicaid enrollee under the assumption that younger and healthier people were dropping out — presumably for Obamacare coverage or employer-based health insurance, or because they didn’t see the need to get coverage — leaving behind an older and sicker population to cover, their executives have told investors.

Several of the companies reported that states have made midyear and retrospective changes in their payments to plans to account for the worsening health status of members.

In an earnings call with analysts on April 25, Molina Healthcare CEO Joe Zubretsky said 19 states increased their payment rates this year to adjust for sicker Medicaid enrollees. “States have been very responsive,” Zubretsky said. “We couldn’t be more pleased with the way our state customers have responded to having rates be commensurate with normal cost trends and trends that have been influenced by the acuity shift.”

Health plans have faced much uncertainty during the Medicaid unwinding, as states began reassessing enrollees’ eligibility and dropping those deemed no longer qualified or who lost coverage because of procedural errors. Before the unwinding, plans said they expected the overall risk profile of their members to go up because those remaining in the program would be sicker.

UnitedHealthcare, Centene, and Molina had Medicaid revenue increases ranging from 3% to 18% in 2023, according to KFF. The two other large Medicaid insurers, Elevance and CVS Health, do not break out Medicaid-specific revenue.

The Medicaid enrollment of the five companies collectively declined by about 10% from the end of March 2023 through the end of December 2023, from 44.2 million people to 39.9 million, KFF data shows.

In the first quarter of 2024, UnitedHealth’s Medicaid revenue rose to $20.5 billion, up from $18.8 billion in the same quarter of 2023.

Molina on April 24 reported nearly $7.5 billion in Medicaid revenue in the first quarter of 2024, up from $6.3 billion in the same quarter a year earlier.

On April 26, Centene reported that its Medicaid enrollment fell 18.5% to 13.3 million in the first quarter of 2024 compared with the same period a year ago. The company’s Medicaid revenue dipped 3% to $22.2 billion.

Unlike UnitedHealthcare, whose Medicaid enrollment fell to 7.7 million in March 2024 from 8.4 million a year prior, Molina’s Medicaid enrollment rose in the first quarter of 2024 to 5.1 million from 4.8 million in March 2023. Molina’s enrollment jump last year was partly a result of its having bought a Medicaid plan in Wisconsin and gained a new Medicaid contract in Iowa, the company said in its earnings news release.

Molina added 1 million members because states were prohibited from terminating Medicaid coverage during the pandemic. The company has lost 550,000 of those people during the unwinding and expects to lose an additional 50,000 by June.

About 90% of Molina Medicaid members have gone through the redetermination process, Zubretsky said.

The corporate giants also offset the enrollment losses by getting more Medicaid money from states, which they use to pass on higher payments to certain facilities or providers, Schneider said. By holding the money temporarily, the companies can count these “directed payments” as revenue.

Medicaid health plans were big winners during the pandemic after the federal government prohibited states from dropping people from the program, leading to a surge in enrollment to about 93 million Americans.

States made efforts to limit health plans’ profits by clawing back some payments above certain thresholds, said Elizabeth Hinton, an associate director at KFF.

But once the prohibition on dropping Medicaid enrollees was lifted last spring, the plans faced uncertainty. It was unclear how many people would lose coverage or when it would happen. Since the unwinding began, more than 20 million people have been dropped from the rolls.

Medicaid enrollees’ health care costs were lower during the pandemic, and some states decided to exclude pandemic-era cost data as they considered how to set payment rates for 2024. That provided yet another win for the Medicaid health plans.

Most states are expected to complete their Medicaid unwinding processes this year.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

CHARLESTON, S.C. — When he recently walked into the dental clinic at the Medical University of South Carolina donning a bright-blue pullover with “In Our DNA SC” embroidered prominently on the front, Lee Moultrie said, two Black women stopped him to ask questions.

“It’s a walking billboard,” said Moultrie, a health care advocate who serves on the community advisory board for In Our DNA SC, a study underway at the university that aims to enroll 100,000 South Carolinians — including a representative percentage of Black people — in genetics research. The goal is to better understand how genes affect health risks such as cancer and heart disease.

Moultrie, who is Black and has participated in the research project himself, used the opportunity at the dental clinic to encourage the women to sign up and contribute their DNA. He keeps brochures about the study in his car and at the barbershop he visits weekly for this reason. It’s one way he wants to help solve a problem that has plagued the field of genetics research for decades: The data is based mostly on DNA from white people.

Project leaders in Charleston told KFF Health News in 2022 that they hoped to enroll participants who reflect the demographic diversity of South Carolina, where just under 27% of residents identify as Black or African American. To date, though, they’ve failed to hit that mark. Only about 12% of the project’s participants who provided sociodemographic data identify as Black, while an additional 5% have identified as belonging to another racial minority group.

“We’d like to be a lot more diverse,” acknowledged Daniel Judge, principal investigator for the study and a cardiovascular genetics specialist at the Medical University of South Carolina.

Lack of diversity in genetics research has real health care implications. Since the completion more than 20 years ago of the Human Genome Project, which mapped most human genes for the first time, close to 90% of genomics studies have been conducted using DNA from participants of European descent, research shows. And while human beings of all races and ancestries are more than 99% genetically identical, even small differences in genes can spell big differences in health outcomes.

“Precision medicine” is a term used to describe how genetics can improve the way diseases are diagnosed and treated by considering a person’s DNA, environment, and lifestyle. But if this emerging field of health care is based on research involving mostly white people, “it could lead to mistakes, unknowingly,” said Misa Graff, an associate professor in epidemiology at the University of North Carolina and a genetics researcher.

In fact, that’s already happening. In 2016, for example, research found that some Black patients had been misdiagnosed with a potentially fatal heart condition because they’d tested positive for a genetic variant thought to be harmful. That variant is much more common among Black Americans than white Americans, the research found, and is considered likely harmless among Black people. Misclassifications can be avoided if “even modest numbers of people from diverse populations are included in sequence databases,” the authors wrote.

The genetics research project in Charleston requires participants to complete an online consent form and submit a saliva sample, either in person at a designated lab or collection event or by mail. They are not paid to participate, but they do receive a report outlining their DNA results. Those who test positive for a genetic marker linked to cancer or high cholesterol are offered a virtual appointment with a genetics counselor free of charge.

Some research projects require more time from their volunteers, which can skew the pool of participants, Graff said, because not everyone has the luxury of free time. “We need to be even more creative in how we obtain people to help contribute to studies,” she said.

Moultrie said he recently asked project leaders to reach out to African American media outlets throughout the Palmetto State to explain how the genetics research project works and to encourage Black people to participate. He also suggested that when researchers talk to Black community leaders, such as church pastors, they ought to persuade those leaders to enroll in the study instead of simply passing the message along to their congregations.

“We have new ideas. We have ways we can do this,” Moultrie said. “We’ll get there.”

Other ongoing efforts are already improving diversity in genetics research. At the National Institutes of Health, a program called “All of Us” aims to analyze the DNA of more than 1 million people across the country to build a diverse health database. So far, that program has enrolled more than 790,000 participants. Of these, more than 560,000 have provided DNA samples and about 45% identify as being part of a racial or ethnic minority group.

“Diversity is so important,” said Karriem Watson, chief engagement officer for the All of Us research program. “When you think about groups that carry the greatest burden of disease, we know that those groups are often from minoritized populations.”

Diverse participation in All of Us hasn’t come about by accident. NIH researchers strategically partnered with community health centers, faith-based groups, and Black fraternities and sororities to recruit people who have been historically underrepresented in biomedical research.

In South Carolina, for example, the NIH works with Cooperative Health, a network of federally qualified health centers near the state capital that serve many patients who are uninsured and Black, to recruit patients for All of Us. Eric Schlueter, chief medical officer of Cooperative Health, said the partnership works because their patients trust them.

“We have a strong history of being integrated into the community. Many of our employees grew up and still live in the same communities that we serve,” Schlueter said. “That is what is part of our secret sauce.”

So far, Cooperative Health has enrolled almost 3,000 people in the research program, about 70% of whom are Black.

“Our patients are just like other patients,” Schlueter said. “They want to be able to provide an opportunity for their children and their children’s children to have better health, and they realize this is an opportunity to do that.”

Theoretically, researchers at the NIH and the Medical University of South Carolina may be trying to recruit some of the same people for their separate genetics studies, although nothing would prevent a patient from participating in both efforts.

The researchers in Charleston acknowledge they still have work to do. To date, In Our DNA SC has recruited about half of the 100,000 people it hopes for, and of those, about three-quarters have submitted DNA samples.

Caitlin Allen, a program investigator and a public health researcher at the medical university, acknowledged that some of the program’s tactics haven’t succeeded in recruiting many Black participants.

For example, some patients scheduled to see providers at the Medical University of South Carolina receive an electronic message through their patient portal before an appointment, which includes information about participating in the research project. But studies show that racial and ethnic minorities are less likely to engage with their electronic health records than white patients, Allen said.

“We see low uptake” with that strategy, she said, because many of the people researchers are trying to engage likely aren’t receiving the message.

The study involves four research coordinators trained to take DNA samples, but there’s a limit to how many people they can talk to face-to-face. “We’re not necessarily able to go into every single room,” Allen said.

That said, in-person community events seem to work well for enrolling diverse participants. In March, In Our DNA SC research coordinators collected more than 30 DNA samples at a bicentennial event in Orangeburg, South Carolina, where more than 60% of residents identify as Black. Between the first and second year of the research project, Allen said, In Our DNA SC doubled the number of these community events that research coordinators attended.

“I would love to see it ramp up even more,” she said.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

With little pomp, California launched two apps at the start of the year offering free behavioral health services to youths to help them cope with everything from living with anxiety to body acceptance.

Through their phones, young people and some caregivers can meet BrightLife Kids and Soluna coaches, some who specialize in peer support or substance use disorders, for roughly 30-minute virtual counseling sessions that are best suited to those with more mild needs, typically those without a clinical diagnosis. The apps also feature self-directed activities, such as white noise sessions, guided breathing, and videos of ocean waves to help users relax.

“We believe they’re going to have not just great impact, but wide impact across California, especially in places where maybe it’s not so easy to find an in-person behavioral health visit or the kind of coaching and supports that parents and young people need,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom’s health secretary, Mark Ghaly, during the Jan. 16 announcement.

The apps represent one of the Democratic governor’s major forays into health technology and come with four-year contracts valued at $498 million. California is believed to be the first state to offer a mental health app with free coaching to all young residents, according to the Department of Health Care Services, which operates the program.

However, the rollout has been slow. So slow that one of the companies has missed a deadline to make its app available on Android phones. Only about 15,000 of the state’s 12.6 million children and young adults have signed up for the apps, and school counselors say they’ve never heard of them.

Advocates for youth question the wisdom of investing taxpayer dollars in two private companies. Social workers are concerned the companies’ coaches won’t properly identify youths who need referrals for clinical care. And the spending is drawing lawmaker scrutiny amid a state deficit pegged at as much as $73 billion.

An App for That

Newsom’s administration says the apps fill a need for young Californians and their families to access professional telehealth for free, in multiple languages, and outside of standard 9-to-5 hours. It’s part of Newsom’s sweeping $4.7 billion master plan for kids’ mental health, which was introduced in 2022 to increase access to mental health and substance use support services. In addition to launching virtual tools such as the teletherapy apps, the initiative is working to expand workforce capacity, especially in underserved areas.

“The reality is that we are rarely 6 feet away from our devices,” said Sohil Sud, director of Newsom’s Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. “The question is how we can leverage technology as a resource for all California youth and families, not in place of, but in addition to, other behavioral health services that are being developed and expanded.”

The virtual platforms come amid rising depression and suicide rates among youth and a shortage of mental health providers. Nearly half of California youths from the ages of 12 to 17 report having recently struggled with mental health issues, with nearly a third experiencing serious psychological distress, according to a 2021 study by the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. These rates are even higher for multiracial youths and those from low-income families.

But those supporting youth mental health at the local level question whether the apps will move the needle on climbing depression and suicide rates.

“It’s fair to applaud the state of California for aggressively seeking new tools,” said Alex Briscoe of California Children’s Trust, a statewide initiative that, along with more than 100 local partners, works to improve the social and emotional health of children. “We just don’t see it as fundamental. And we don’t believe the youth mental health crisis will be solved by technology projects built by a professional class who don’t share the lived experience of marginalized communities.”

The apps, BrightLife Kids and Soluna, are operated by two companies: Brightline, a 5-year-old venture capital-backed startup; and Kooth, a London-based publicly traded company that has experience in the U.K. and has also signed on some schools in Kentucky and Pennsylvania and a health plan in Illinois. In the first five months of Kooth’s Pennsylvania pilot, 6% of students who had access to the app signed up.

Brightline and Kooth represent a growing number of health tech firms seeking to profit in this space. They beat out dozens of other bidders including international consulting companies and other youth telehealth platforms that had already snapped up contracts in California.

Although the service is intended to be free with no insurance requirement, Brightline’s app, BrightLife Kids, is folded into and only accessible through the company’s main app, which asks for insurance information and directs users to paid licensed counseling options alongside the free coaching. After California Healthline questioned why the free coaching was advertised below paid options, Brightline reordered the page so that, even if a child has high-acuity needs, free coaching shows up first.

The apps take an expansive view of behavioral health, making the tools available to all California youth under age 26 as well as caregivers of babies, toddlers, and children 12 and under. When California Healthline asked to speak with an app user, Brightline connected a reporter with a mother whose 3-year-old daughter was learning to sleep on her own.

‘It’s Like Crickets’

Despite being months into the launch and having millions in marketing funds, the companies don’t have a definitive rollout timeline. Brightline said it hopes to have deployed teams across the state to present the tools in person by midyear. Kooth said developing a strategy to hit every school would be “the main focus for this calendar year.”

“It’s a big state — 58 counties,” Bob McCullough of Kooth said. “It’ll take us a while to get to all of them.”

Brightline’s contract states that the company was required to launch downloadable apps for iOS and Android phones by January, but so far BrightLife Kids is available only on Apple phones. Brightline said it’s aiming to launch the Android version over the summer.

“Nobody’s really done anything like this at this magnitude, I think, in the U.S. before,” said Naomi Allen, a co-founder and the CEO of Brightline. “We’re very much in the early innings. We’re already learning a lot.”

The contracts, obtained by California Healthline through a records request, show the companies operating the two apps could earn as much as $498 million through the contract term, which ends in June 2027, months after Newsom is set to leave office. And the state is spending hundreds of millions more on Newsom’s virtual behavioral health strategy. The state said it aims to make the apps available long-term, depending on usage.

The state said 15,000 people signed up in the first three months. When California Healthline asked how many of those users actively engaged with the app, it declined to say, noting that data would be released this summer.

California Healthline reached out to nearly a dozen California mental health professionals and youths. None of them were aware of the apps.

“I’m not hearing anything,” said Loretta Whitson, executive director of the California Association of School Counselors. “It’s like crickets.”

Whitson said she doesn’t think the apps are on “anyone’s” radar in schools, and she doesn’t know of any schools that are actively advertising them. Brightline will be presenting its tool to the counselor association in May, but Whitson said the company didn’t reach out to plan the meeting; she did.

Concern Over Referrals

Whitson isn’t comfortable promoting the apps just yet. Although both companies said they have a clinical team on staff to assist, Whitson said she’s concerned that the coaches, who aren’t all licensed therapists, won’t have the training to detect when users need more help and refer them to clinical care.

This sentiment was echoed by other school-based social workers, who also noted the apps’ duplicative nature — in some counties, like Los Angeles, youths can access free virtual counseling sessions through Hazel Health, a for-profit company. Nonprofits, too, have entered this space. For example, Teen Line, a peer-to-peer hotline operated by Southern California-based Didi Hirsch Mental Health Services, is free nationwide.

While the state is also funneling money to the schools as part of Newsom’s master plan, students and school-based mental health professionals voiced confusion at the large app investment when, in many school districts, few in-person counseling roles exist, and in some cases are dwindling.

Kelly Merchant, a student at College of the Desert in Palm Desert, noted that it can be hard to access in-person therapy at her school. She believes the community college, which has about 15,000 students, has only one full-time counselor and one part-time bilingual counselor. She and several students interviewed by California Healthline said they appreciated having engaging content on their phone and the ability to speak to a coach, but all said they’d prefer in-person therapy.

“There are a lot of people who are seeking therapy, and people close to me that I know. But their insurances are taking forever, and they’re on the waitlist,” Merchant said. “And, like, you’re seeing all these people struggle.”

Fiscal conservatives question whether the money could be spent more effectively, like to bolster county efforts and existing youth behavioral health programs.

Republican state Sen. Roger Niello, vice chair of the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, noted that California is forecasted to face deficits for the next three years, and taxpayer watchdogs worry the apps might cost even more in the long run.

“What starts as a small financial commitment can become uncontrollable expenses down the road,” said Susan Shelley of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

More than 60 years ago, policymakers in Colorado embraced the idea that early intervention could prevent child abuse and save lives. The state’s requirement that certain professionals tell officials when they suspect a child has been abused or neglected was among the first mandatory reporting laws in the nation.

Since then, mandatory reporting laws have expanded nationally to include more types of maltreatment — including neglect, which now accounts for most reports — and have increased the number of professions required to report. In some states, all adults are required to report what they suspect may be abuse or neglect.

But now there are efforts in Colorado and other states to roll back these laws, saying the result has been too many unfounded reports, and that they disproportionately harm families that are poor, Black, or Indigenous, or have members with disabilities.

“There’s a long, depressing history based on the approach that our primary response to a struggling family is reporting,” said Mical Raz, a physician and historian at the University of Rochester in New York. “There’s now a wealth of evidence that demonstrates that more reporting is not associated with better outcomes for children.”

Stephanie Villafuerte, Colorado’s child protection ombudsman, oversees a task force to reexamine the state’s mandatory reporting laws. She said the group is seeking to balance a need to report legitimate cases of abuse and neglect with a desire to weed out inappropriate reports.

“This is designed to help individuals who are disproportionately impacted,” Villafuerte said. “I’m hoping it’s the combination of these efforts that could make a difference.”

Some critics worry that changes to the law could result in missed cases of abuse. Medical and child care workers on the task force have expressed concern about legal liability. While it’s rare for people to be criminally charged for failure to report, they can also face civil liability or professional repercussions, including threats to their licenses.

Being reported to child protective services is becoming increasingly common. More than 1 in 3 children in the United States will be the subject of a child abuse and neglect investigation by the time they turn 18, according to the most frequently cited estimate, a 2017 study funded by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Children’s Bureau.

Black and Native American families, poor families, and parents or children with disabilities experience even more oversight. Research has found that, among these groups, parents are more likely to lose parental rights and children are more likely to wind up in foster care.

In an overwhelming majority of investigations, no abuse or neglect is substantiated. Nonetheless, researchers who study how these investigations affect families describe them as terrifying and isolating.

In Colorado, the number of child abuse and neglect reports has increased 42% in the past decade and reached a record 117,762 last year, according to state data. Roughly 100,000 other calls to the hotline weren’t counted as reports because they were requests for information or were about matters like child support or adult protection, said officials from the Colorado Department of Human Services.

The increase in reports can be traced to a policy of encouraging a broad array of professionals — including school and medical staff, therapists, coaches, clergy members, firefighters, veterinarians, dentists, and social workers — to call a hotline whenever they have a concern.

These calls don’t reflect a surge in mistreatment. More than two-thirds of the reports received by agencies in Colorado don’t meet the threshold for investigation. Of the children whose cases are assessed, 21% are found to have experienced abuse or neglect. The actual number of substantiated cases has not risen over the past decade.

While studies do not demonstrate that mandatory reporting laws keep children safe, the Colorado task force reported in January, there is evidence of harm. “Mandatory reporting disproportionately impacts families of color” — initiating contact between child protection services and families who routinely do not present concerns of abuse or neglect, the task force said.

The task force said it is analyzing whether better screening might mitigate “the disproportionate impact of mandatory reporting on under-resourced communities, communities of color and persons with disabilities.”

The task force pointed out that the only way to report concerns about a child is with a formal report to a hotline. Yet many of those calls are not to report abuse at all but rather attempts to connect children and families with resources like food or housing assistance.

Hotline callers may mean to help, but the families who are the subjects of mistaken reports of abuse and neglect rarely see it that way.

That includes Meighen Lovelace, a rural Colorado resident who asked California Healthline not to disclose their hometown for fear of attracting unwanted attention from local officials. For Lovelace’s daughter, who is neurodivergent and has physical disabilities, the reports started when she entered preschool at age 4 in 2015. The teachers and medical providers making the reports frequently suggested that the county human services agency could assist Lovelace’s family. But the investigations that followed were invasive and traumatic.

“Our biggest looming fear is, ‘Are you going to take our children away?’” said Lovelace, who is an advocate for the Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition, an organization that lobbies for the civil rights of people with disabilities. “We’re afraid to ask for help. It’s keeping us from entering services because of the fear of child welfare.”

State and county human services officials said they could not comment on specific cases.

The Colorado task force plans to suggest clarifying the definitions of abuse and neglect under the state’s mandatory reporting statute. Mandatory reporters should not “make a report solely due to a family/child’s race, class or gender,” nor because of inadequate housing, furnishings, income or clothing. Also, there should not be a report based solely on the “disability status of the minor, parent or guardian,” according to the group’s draft recommendation.

The task force plans to recommend additional training for mandatory reporters, help for professionals who are deciding whether to make a call, and an alternative phone number, or “warmline,” for cases in which callers believe a family needs material assistance, rather than surveillance.

Critics say such changes could leave more children vulnerable to unreported abuse.

“I’m concerned about adding systems such as the warmline, that kids who are in real danger are going to slip through the cracks and not be helped,” said Hollynd Hoskins, an attorney who represents victims of child abuse. Hoskins has sued professionals who fail to report their suspicions.

The Colorado task force includes health and education officials, prosecutors, victim advocates, county child welfare representatives and attorneys, as well as five people who have experience in the child welfare system. It intends to finalize its recommendations by early next year in the hope that state legislators will consider policy changes in 2025. Implementation of any new laws could take several years.

Colorado is one of several states — including New York and California — that have recently considered changes to restrain, rather than expand, reporting of abuse. In New York City, teachers are being trained to think twice before making a report, while New York state introduced a warmline to help connect families with resources like housing and child care. In California, a state task force aimed at shifting “mandated reporting to community supporting” is planning recommendations similar to Colorado’s.

Among those advocating for change are people with experience in the child welfare system. They include Maleeka Jihad, who leads the Denver-based MJCF Coalition, which advocates for the abolition of mandatory reporting along with the rest of the child welfare system, citing its damage to Black, Native American, and Latino communities.

“Mandatory reporting is another form of keeping us policed and surveillanced by whiteness,” said Jihad, who as a child was taken from the care of a loving parent and placed temporarily into the foster system. Reform isn’t enough, she said. “We know what we need, and it’s usually funding and resources.”

Some of these resources — like affordable housing and child care — don’t exist at a level sufficient for all the Colorado families that need them, Jihad said.

Other services are out there, but it’s a matter of finding them. Lovelace said the reports ebbed after the family got the help it needed, in the form of a Medicaid waiver that paid for specialized care for their daughter’s disabilities. Their daughter is now in seventh grade and doing well.

None of the caseworkers who visited the family ever mentioned the waiver, Lovelace said. “I really think they didn’t know about it.”

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

Some justices suggested the Supreme Court had said its piece on abortion law when it overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. This term, however, the court has agreed to review another abortion case. At issue is whether a federal law requiring emergency care in hospitals overrides Idaho’s near-total abortion ban. A decision is expected by summer.

Meanwhile, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid finalized the first-ever minimum staffing requirements for nursing homes participating in the programs. But the industry argues that there are not enough workers to hire to meet the standards.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of KFF Health News, Joanne Kenen of the Johns Hopkins University’s nursing and public health schools and Politico Magazine, Tami Luhby of CNN, and Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico.

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

• This week’s Supreme Court hearing on emergency abortion care in Idaho was the first challenge to a state’s abortion ban since the overturn of the constitutional right to an abortion. Unlike previous abortion cases, this one focused on the everyday impacts of bans on abortion care — cases in which pregnant patients experienced medical emergencies.
• Establishment medical groups and doctors themselves are getting more vocal and active as states set laws on abortion access. In a departure from earlier political moments, some major medical groups are campaigning on state ballot measures.
• Medicaid officials this week finalized new rules intended to more closely regulate managed-care plans that enroll Medicaid patients. The rules are intended to ensure, among other things, that patients have prompt access to needed primary care doctors and specialists.
• Also this week, the Federal Trade Commission voted to ban most “noncompete” clauses in employment contracts. Such language has become common in health care and prevents not just doctors but other health workers from changing jobs — often forcing those workers to move or commute to leave a position. Business interests are already suing to block the new rules, claiming they would be too expensive and risk the loss of proprietary information to competitors.
• The fallout from the cyberattack of Change Healthcare continues, as yet another group is demanding ransom from UnitedHealth Group, Change’s owner. UnitedHealth said in a statement this week that the records of “a substantial portion of America” may be involved in the breach.

Plus for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: NBC News’ “Women Are Less Likely To Die When Treated by Female Doctors, Study Suggests,” by Liz Szabo.  

Alice Miranda Ollstein: States Newsroom’s “Loss of Federal Protection in Idaho Spurs Pregnant Patients To Plan for Emergency Air Transport,” by Kelcie Moseley-Morris.  

Tami Luhby: The Associated Press’ “Mississippi Lawmakers Haggle Over Possible Medicaid Expansion as Their Legislative Session Nears End,” by Emily Wagster Pettus.  

Joanne Kenen: States Newsroom’s “Missouri Prison Agency To Pay $60K for Sunshine Law Violations Over Inmate Death Records,” by Rudi Keller.  

Also mentioned on this week’s podcast:

---

To hear all our podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to KFF Health News’ “What the Health?” on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

For decades, concerns about automobile pollution have focused on what comes out of the tailpipe. Now, researchers and regulators say, we need to pay more attention to toxic emissions from tires as vehicles roll down the road.

At the top of the list of worries is a chemical called 6PPD, which is added to rubber tires to help them last longer. When tires wear on pavement, 6PPD is released. It reacts with ozone to become a different chemical, 6PPD-q, which can be extremely toxic — so much so that it has been linked to repeated fish kills in Washington state.

The trouble with tires doesn’t stop there. Tires are made primarily of natural rubber and synthetic rubber, but they contain hundreds of other ingredients, often including steel and heavy metals such as copper, lead, cadmium, and zinc.

As car tires wear, the rubber disappears in particles, both bits that can be seen with the naked eye and microparticles. Testing by a British company, Emissions Analytics, found that a car’s tires emit 1 trillion ultrafine particles per kilometer driven — from 5 to 9 pounds of rubber per internal combustion car per year.

And what’s in those particles is a mystery, because tire ingredients are proprietary.

“You’ve got a chemical cocktail in these tires that no one really understands and is kept highly confidential by the tire manufacturers,” said Nick Molden, CEO of Emissions Analytics. “We struggle to think of another consumer product that is so prevalent in the world and used by virtually everyone, where there is so little known of what is in them.”

Regulators have only begun to address the toxic tire problem, though there has been some action on 6PPD.

The chemical was identified by a team of researchers, led by scientists at Washington State University and the University of Washington, who were trying to determine why coho salmon returning to Seattle-area creeks to spawn were dying in large numbers.

Working for the Washington Stormwater Center, the scientists tested some 2,000 substances to determine which one was causing the die-offs, and in 2020 they announced they’d found the culprit: 6PPD.

The Yurok Tribe in Northern California, along with two other West Coast Native American tribes, have petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to prohibit the chemical. The EPA said it is considering new rules governing the chemical. “We could not sit idle while 6PPD kills the fish that sustain us,” said Joseph L. James, chairman of the Yurok Tribe, in a statement. “This lethal toxin has no place in any salmon-bearing watershed.”

California has begun taking steps to regulate the chemical, last year classifying tires containing it as a “priority product,” which requires manufacturers to search for and test substitutes.

“6PPD plays a crucial role in the safety of tires on California’s roads and, currently, there are no widely available safer alternatives,” said Karl Palmer, a deputy director at the state’s Department of Toxic Substances Control. “For this reason, our framework is ideally suited for identifying alternatives to 6PPD that ensure the continued safety of tires on California’s roads while protecting California’s fish populations and the communities that rely on them.”

The U.S. Tire Manufacturers Association says it has mobilized a consortium of 16 tire manufacturers to carry out an analysis of alternatives. Anne Forristall Luke, USTMA president and CEO, said it “will yield the most effective and exhaustive review possible of whether a safer alternative to 6PPD in tires currently exists.”

Molden, however, said there is a catch. “If they don’t investigate, they aren’t allowed to sell in the state of California,” he said. “If they investigate and don’t find an alternative, they can go on selling. They don’t have to find a substitute. And today there is no alternative to 6PPD.”

California is also studying a request by the California Stormwater Quality Association to classify tires containing zinc, a heavy metal, as a priority product, requiring manufacturers to search for an alternative. Zinc is used in the vulcanization process to increase the strength of the rubber.

When it comes to tire particles, though, there hasn’t been any action, even as the problem worsens with the proliferation of electric cars. Because of their quicker acceleration and greater torque, electric vehicles wear out tires faster and emit an estimated 20% more tire particles than the average gas-powered car.

A recent study in Southern California found tire and brake emissions in Anaheim accounted for 30% of PM2.5, a small-particulate air pollutant, while exhaust emissions accounted for 19%. Tests by Emissions Analytics have found that tires produce up to 2,000 times as much particle pollution by mass as tailpipes.

These particles end up in water and air and are often ingested. Ultrafine particles, even smaller than PM2.5, are also emitted by tires and can be inhaled and travel directly to the brain. New research suggests tire microparticles should be classified as a pollutant of “high concern.”

In a report issued last year, researchers at Imperial College London said the particles could affect the heart, lungs, and reproductive organs and cause cancer.

People who live or work along roadways, often low-income, are exposed to more of the toxic substances.

Tires are also a major source of microplastics. More than three-quarters of microplastics entering the ocean come from the synthetic rubber in tires, according to a report from the Pew Charitable Trusts and the British company Systemiq.

And there are still a great many unknowns in tire emissions, which can be especially complex to analyze because heat and pressure can transform tire ingredients into other compounds.

One outstanding research question is whether 6PPD-q affects people, and what health problems, if any, it could cause. A recent study published in Environmental Science & Technology Letters found high levels of the chemical in urine samples from a region of South China, with levels highest in pregnant women.

The discovery of 6PPD-q, Molden said, has sparked fresh interest in the health and environmental impacts of tires, and he expects an abundance of new research in the coming years. “The jigsaw pieces are coming together,” he said. “But it’s a thousand-piece jigsaw, not a 200-piece jigsaw.”

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

New technologies are making it easier for companies to fix prices and discriminate against individual consumers, the Biden administration’s top consumer watchdog said Tuesday.

Algorithms make it possible for companies to fix prices without explicitly coordinating with one another, posing a new test for regulators policing the market, said Lina Khan, chair of the Federal Trade Commission, during a media event hosted by KFF.

“I think we could be entering a somewhat novel era of pricing,” Khan told reporters.

Khan is regarded as one of the most aggressive antitrust regulators in recent U.S. history, and she has paid particular attention to the harm that technological advances can pose to consumers. Antitrust regulators at the FTC and the Justice Department set a record for merger challenges in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, 2022, according to Bloomberg News.

Last year, the FTC successfully blocked biotech company Illumina’s over $7 billion acquisition of cancer-screening company Grail. The FTC, Justice Department, and Health and Human Services Department launched a website on April 18, healthycompetition.gov, to make it easier for people to report suspected anticompetitive behavior in the health care industry.

The American Hospital Association, the industry’s largest trade group, has often criticized the Biden administration’s approach to antitrust enforcement. In comments in September on proposed guidance the FTC and Justice Department published for companies, the AHA said that “the guidelines reflect a fundamental hostility to mergers.”

Price fixing removes competition from the market and generally makes goods and services more expensive. The agency has argued in court filings that price fixing “is still illegal even if you are achieving it through an algorithm,” Khan said. “There’s no kind of algorithmic exemption to the antitrust laws.”

By simply using the same algorithms to set prices, companies can effectively charge the same “even if they’re not, you know, getting in a back room and kind of shaking hands and setting a price,” Khan said, using the example of residential property managers.

Khan said the commission is also scrutinizing the use of artificial intelligence and algorithms to set prices for individual consumers “based on all of this particular behavioral data about you: the websites you visited, you know, who you had lunch with, where you live.”

And as health care companies change the way they structure their businesses to maximize profits, the FTC is changing the way it analyzes behavior that could hurt consumers, Khan said.

Hiring people who can “help us look under the hood” of some inscrutable algorithms was a priority, Khan said. She said it’s already paid off in the form of legal actions “that are only possible because we had technologists on the team helping us figure out what are these algorithms doing.”

Traditionally, the FTC has policed health care by challenging local or regional hospital mergers that have the potential to reduce competition and raise prices. But consolidation in health care has evolved, Khan said.

Mergers of systems that don’t overlap geographically are increasing, she said. In addition, hospitals now often buy doctor practices, while pharmacy benefit managers start their own insurance companies or mail-order pharmacies — or vice versa — pursuing “vertical integration” that can hurt consumers, she said.

The FTC is hearing increasing complaints “about how these firms are using their monopoly power” and “exercising it in ways that’s resulting in higher prices for patients, less service, as well as worse conditions for health care workers,” Khan said.

Policing Noncompetes

Khan said she was surprised at how many health care workers responded to the commission’s recent proposal to ban “noncompete” clauses — agreements that can prevent employees from moving to new jobs. The FTC issued its final rule banning the practice on Tuesday. She said the ban was aimed at low-wage industries like fast food but that many of the comments in favor of the FTC’s plan came from health professions.

Health workers say noncompete agreements are “both personally devastating and also impeded patient care,” Khan said.

In some cases, doctors wrote that their patients “got really upset because they wanted to stick with me, but my hospital was saying I couldn’t,” Khan said. Some doctors ended up commuting long distances to prevent the rest of their families from having to move after they changed jobs, she said.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

KALISPELL, Mont. — On a cold February morning at the Flathead Warming Center, Tashya Evans waited for help with her Medicaid application as others at the shelter got ready for the day in this northwestern Montana city.

Evans said she lost Medicaid coverage in September because she hadn’t received paperwork after moving from Great Falls, Montana. She has had to forgo the blood pressure medication she can no longer pay for since losing coverage. She has also had to put off needed dental work.

“The teeth broke off. My gums hurt. There’s some times where I’m not feeling good, I don’t want to eat,” she said.

Evans is one of about 130,000 Montanans who have lost Medicaid coverage as the state reevaluates everyone’s eligibility following a pause in disenrollments during the covid-19 pandemic. About two-thirds of those who were kicked off state Medicaid rolls lost coverage for technical reasons, such as incorrectly filling out paperwork. That’s one of the highest procedural disenrollment rates in the nation, according to a KFF analysis.

Even unsheltered people like Evans are losing their coverage, despite state officials saying they would automatically renew people who should still qualify by using Social Security and disability data.

As other guests filtered out of the shelter that February morning, Evans sat down in a spare office with an application counselor from Greater Valley Health Clinic, which serves much of the homeless population here, and recounted her struggle to reenroll.

She said that she had asked for help at the state public assistance office, but that the staff didn’t have time to answer her questions about which forms she needed to fill out or to walk her through the paperwork. She tried the state’s help line, but couldn’t get through.

“You just get to the point where you’re like, ‘I’m frustrated right now. I just have other things that are more important, and let’s not deal with it,’” she said.

Evans has a job and spends her free time finding a place to sleep since she doesn’t have housing. Waiting on the phone most of the day isn’t feasible.

There’s no public data on how many unhoused people in Montana or nationwide have lost Medicaid, but homeless service providers and experts say it’s a big problem.

Those assisting unsheltered people who have lost coverage say they spend much of their time helping people contact the Montana Medicaid office. Sorting through paperwork mistakes is also a headache, said Crystal Baker, a case manager at HRDC, a homeless shelter in Bozeman.

“We’re getting mail that’s like, ‘Oh, this needs to be turned in by this date,’ and that’s already two weeks past. So, now we have to start the process all over again,” she said. “Now, they have to wait two to three months without insurance.”

Montana health officials told NPR and KFF Health News in a statement that they provided training to help homeless service agencies prepare their clients for redetermination.

Federal health officials have warned Montana and some other conservative states against disenrolling high rates of people for technicalities, also known as procedural disenrollment. They also warned states about unreasonable barriers to accessing help, such as long hold times on help lines. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services said if states don’t reduce the rate of procedural disenrollments, the agency could force them to halt their redetermination process altogether. So far, CMS hasn’t taken that step.

Charlie Brereton, the director of the Montana health department, resisted calls from Democratic state lawmakers to pause the redetermination process. Redetermination ended in January, four months ahead of the federal deadline.

“I’m confident in our redetermination process,” Brereton told lawmakers in December. “I do believe that many of the Medicaid members who’ve been disenrolled were disenrolled correctly.

Health industry observers say that both liberal-leaning and conservative-leaning states are kicking homeless people off their rolls and that the redetermination process has been chaotic everywhere. Because of the barriers that unsheltered people face, it’s easy for them to fall through the cracks.

Margot Kushel, a physician and a homeless researcher at the University of California-San Francisco, said it may not seem like a big deal to fill out paperwork. But, she said, “put yourself in the position of an elder experiencing homelessness,” especially those without access to a computer, phone, or car.

If they still qualify, people can usually get their Medicaid coverage renewed — eventually — and it may reimburse patients retroactively for care received while they were unenrolled.

Kushel said being without Medicaid for any period can be particularly dangerous for people who are homeless. This population tends to have high rates of chronic health conditions.

“Being out of your asthma medicine for three days can be life-threatening. If you have high blood pressure and you suddenly stop your medicine, your blood pressure shoots up, and your risk of having a heart attack goes way up,” she said.

When people don’t understand why they’re losing coverage or how to get it back, that erodes their trust in the medical system, Kushel said.

Evans, the homeless woman, was able to get help with her application and is likely to regain coverage.

Agencies that serve unhoused people said it could take years to get everyone who lost coverage back on Medicaid. They worry that those who go without coverage will resort to using the emergency room rather than managing their health conditions proactively.

Baker, the case manager at the Bozeman shelter, set up several callbacks from the state Medicaid office for one client. The state needed to interview him to make sure he still qualified, but the state never called.

“He waited all day long. By the fifth time, it was so stressful for him, he just gave up,” she said.

That client ended up leaving the Bozeman area before Baker could convince him it was worth trying to regain Medicaid.

Baker worries his poor health will catch up with him before he decides to try again.

This article is from a partnership that includes MTPR, NPR, and KFF Health News.

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

SACRAMENTO — California state lawmakers this year are continuing their progressive tilt on health policy with dozens of proposals including a ban on a Froot Loops ingredient and free condoms for high schoolers.

As states increasingly fracture along partisan lines, California Democrats are stamping their supermajority on legislation that they will consider until they adjourn at the end of August. But the cost of these proposals will be a major factor given the enormity of the state’s deficit, currently estimated at between $38 billion and $73 billion.

Health Coverage

Lawmakers are again considering whether to create a government-run, single-payer health care system for all Californians. AB 2200 is Democratic Assembly member Ash Kalra’s second such attempt, after a similar bill failed in 2022. The price tag would be enormous, though proponents say there would also be related savings. The high potential cost left Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and others skeptical it could become law while the state faces a deficit.

AB 4 would require Covered California, the state’s health insurance exchange, to offer health insurance policies to people who are otherwise not able to obtain coverage because of their immigration status, to the extent it can under federal law. That could eventually lead to subsidized insurance premiums similar to those offered in Colorado and Washington.

Medical Debt

Health care providers and collection agencies would be barred from sharing patients’ medical debt with credit reporting agencies under SB 1061. The bill would also prohibit credit reporting agencies from accepting, storing, or sharing any such information without consumer consent. Last year, the Biden administration announced plans to develop federal rules barring unpaid medical bills from affecting patients’ credit scores. California would be the third state to remove medical bills from consumer credit reports.

Medi-Cal

The Medi-Cal program, which provides health care for low-income people, would be required to cover medically supportive food and nutrition starting July 1, 2026, under AB 1975. The bill builds on an existing but limited pilot program. The legislation says Californians of color could benefit from adequate food and nutrition to combat largely preventable chronic health conditions, and it’s one of 14 measures sought by the California Legislative Black Caucus as part of reparations for racial injustice.

More than 1.6 million California residents, disproportionately Latinos, have been kicked off Medi-Cal since the state resumed annual eligibility checks that were halted during the covid-19 pandemic. AB 2956 would have the state seek federal approval to slow those disenrollments by taking steps such as letting people 19 and older keep their coverage automatically for 12 months.

Violence Prevention

An increase in attacks on health workers is prompting lawmakers to consider boosting criminal penalties. In California, simple assault against workers inside an ER is considered the same as simple assault against almost anyone else, and carries a maximum punishment of a $1,000 fine and six months in jail. In contrast, simple assault against emergency medical workers in the field, such as an EMT responding to a 911 call, carries maximum penalties of a $2,000 fine and a year in jail. AB 977 would set the same maximum penalties for assaulting emergency health care workers on the job, whether they are in the field or an ER.

California could toughen penalties for interfering with reproductive health care services. Posting personal information or photographs of a patient or provider would be a felony if one of them is injured as a result. AB 2099 also boosts penalties for intimidation or obstruction.

Under SB 53, gun owners would have to lock up their weapons in state-approved safes or lockboxes where they would be inaccessible to anyone but the owner or another lawfully authorized user. Democratic Sen. Anthony Portantino, the bill’s author, says that would make it tougher for anyone, including children, to use guns to harm themselves or others or use the weapons to commit crimes. Critics say it would make it harder to access the weapon when it’s needed, such as to counter a home invasion. Relatedly, AB 2621 and AB 2917 address gun violence restraining orders.

Substance Use

The spike in drug overdoses has prompted several responses: AB 3073 would require the state’s public health department to partner with local public health agencies, wastewater treatment facilities, and others to pilot wastewater testing for traces of dangerous drugs in an effort to pinpoint drug hot spots and identify new drugs. AB 1976 would require workplace first-aid kits to include naloxone nasal spray, which can reverse opioid overdoses. And senators have proposed at least nine bills aimed at curbing overdose deaths, particularly from the deadly synthetic opioid fentanyl.

Youth Welfare

Under AB 2229, backed by a “Know Your Period” campaign, school districts’ sex education curricula would have to include menstrual health. There was no registered opposition.

Public schools would have to make free condoms available to all pupils in grades nine to 12 under SB 954, which would help prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections, according to the author, Democratic Sen. Caroline Menjivar. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar bill last year.

Reality show star Paris Hilton is backing a bipartisan bill to require more reporting on the treatment of youth in state-licensed short-term residential therapeutic programs. SB 1043 would require the state Department of Social Services to post information on the use of restraints and seclusion rooms on a public dashboard.

California would expand its regulation of hemp products, which have become increasingly popular among youths as a way to bypass the state’s adults-only restrictions on legal cannabis. AB 2223 would build on a 2021 law that Assembly member Cecilia Aguiar-Curry said in hindsight didn’t go far enough.

Public schools would, under AB 2316, generally be barred from providing food containing red dye 40, titanium dioxide, and other potentially harmful substances, which are currently used in products including Froot Loops and Flamin’ Hot Cheetos. It’s Democratic Assembly member Jesse Gabriel’s follow-up to his legislation last year that attempted to ban a chemical used in Skittles.

Women’s Health

AB 2515 would ban the sale of menstrual products with intentionally added PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals.” PFAS, short for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, have been linked to serious health problems. Newsom vetoed a previous attempt.

Public grade schools and community colleges would, under AB 2901, have to provide 14 weeks of paid leave for pregnancies, miscarriages, childbirth, termination of pregnancies, or recovery. Newsom vetoed a similar bill in 2019.

AB 2319 would improve enforcement of a 2019 law aimed at reducing the disproportionate rate of maternal mortality among Black women and other pregnant women of color.

Social Media

Social media companies could face substantial penalties if they don’t do enough to protect children, under AB 3172. The measure would allow financial damages of up to $1 million for each child under age 18 who proves in court they were harmed, or three times the amount of the child’s actual damages. The industry opposes the bill, calling it harmful censorship.

Cyberbullies could face civil liabilities up to $75,000 under SB 1504, and those damages could be sought by anyone. Under current law, damages are capped at $7,500 and may be pursued only by the state attorney general.

Wellness

Bosses could be fined for repeatedly contacting employees after working hours under AB 2751, a “right to disconnect” bill patterned after similar restrictions in 13 countries. The bill’s author, Democratic Assembly member Matt Haney, said despite the advent of smartphones that “have blurred the boundaries between work and home life,” employees shouldn’t be expected to work around the clock. The measure is opposed by the California Chamber of Commerce.

Finally, Democrat Anthony Rendon, a long-serving state Assembly speaker, is spending his last year in the chamber leading a first-in-the-nation Select Committee on Happiness and Public Policy Outcomes. The committee isn’t planning any legislation but intends to issue a report after lawmakers adjourn in August.

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip

The Biden administration finalized nursing home staffing rules Monday that will require thousands of them to hire more nurses and aides — while giving them years to do so.

The new rules from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services are the most substantial changes to federal oversight of the nation’s roughly 15,000 nursing homes in more than three decades. But they are less stringent than what patient advocates said was needed to provide high-quality care.

Spurred by disproportionate deaths from covid-19 in long-term care facilities, the rules aim to address perennially sparse staffing that can be a root cause of missed diagnoses, severe bedsores, and frequent falls.

“For residents, this will mean more staff, which means fewer ER visits potentially, more independence,” Vice President Kamala Harris said while meeting with nursing home workers in La Crosse, Wisconsin. “For families, it’s going to mean peace of mind in terms of your loved one being taken care of.”

When the regulations are fully enacted, 4 in 5 homes will need to augment their payrolls, CMS estimated. But the new standards are likely to require slight if any improvements for many of the 1.2 million residents in facilities that are already quite close to or meet the minimum levels.

“Historically, this is a big deal, and we’re glad we have now established a floor,” Blanca Castro, California’s long-term care ombudsman, said in an interview. “From here we can go upward, recognizing there will be a lot of complaints about where we are going to get more people to fill these positions.”

The rules primarily address staffing levels for three types of nursing home workers. Registered nurses, or RNs, are the most skilled and responsible for guiding overall care and setting treatment plans. Licensed practical nurses, sometimes called licensed vocational nurses, work under the direction of RNs and perform routine medical care such as taking vital signs. Certified nursing assistants are supposed to be the most plentiful and help residents with daily activities like going to the bathroom, getting dressed, and eating.

While the industry has increased wages by 27% since February 2020, homes say they are still struggling to compete against better-paying work for nurses at hospitals and at retail shops and restaurants for aides. On average, nursing home RNs earn $40 an hour, licensed practical nurses make $31 an hour, and nursing assistants are paid $19 an hour, according to the most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

CMS estimated the rules will ultimately cost $6 billion annually, but the plan omits any more payments from Medicare or Medicaid, the public insurers that cover most residents’ stays — meaning additional wages would have to come out of owners’ pockets or existing facility budgets.

The American Health Care Association, which represents the nursing home industry, called the regulation “an unreasonable standard” that “creates an impossible task for providers” amid a persistent worker shortage nationwide.

“This unfunded mandate doesn’t magically solve the nursing crisis,” the association’s CEO, Mark Parkinson, said in a statement. Parkinson said the industry will keep pressing Congress to overturn the regulation.

Richard Mollot, executive director of the Long Term Care Community Coalition, a New York City-based advocacy nonprofit, said “it is hard to call this a win for nursing home residents and families” given that the minimum levels were below what studies have found to be ideal.

The plan was welcomed by labor unions that represent nurses — and whom President Joe Biden is counting on for support in his reelection campaign. Service Employees International Union President Mary Kay Henry called it a “long-overdue sea change.” This political bond was underscored by the administration’s decision to have Harris announce the rule with SEIU members in Wisconsin, a swing state.

The new rules supplant the vague federal mandate that has been in place since the 1980s requiring nursing homes to have “sufficient” staffing to meet residents’ needs. In practice, inspectors rarely categorized inadequate staffing as a serious infraction resulting in possible penalties, federal records show.

Starting in two years, most homes must provide an average of at least 3.48 hours of daily care per resident. About 6 in 10 nursing homes are already operating at that level, a KFF analysis found.

The rules give homes breathing room before they must comply with more specific requirements. Within three years, most nursing homes will need to provide daily RN care of at least 0.55 hours per resident and 2.45 hours from aides.

CMS also mandated that within two years an RN must be on duty at all times in case of a patient crisis on weekends or overnight. Currently, CMS requires at least eight consecutive hours of RN presence each day and a licensed nurse of any level on duty around the clock. An inspector general report found that nearly a thousand nursing homes didn’t meet those basic requirements.

Nursing homes in rural areas will have longer to staff up. Within three years, they must meet the overall staffing numbers and the round-the-clock RN requirement. CMS’ rule said rural homes have four years to achieve the RN and nurse aide thresholds, although there was some confusion within CMS, as its press materials said rural homes would have five years.

Under the new rules, the average nursing home, which has around 100 residents, would need to have at least two RNs working each day, and at least 10 or 11 nurse aides, the administration said. Homes could meet the overall requirements through two more workers, who could be RNs, vocational nurses, or aides.

Homes can get a hardship exemption from the minimums if they are in regions with low populations of nurses or aides and demonstrate good-faith efforts to recruit.

Democrats praised the rules, though some said the administration did not go nearly far enough. Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), the ranking member of the House Ways and Means Health Subcommittee, said the changes were “modest improvements” but that “much more is needed to ensure sufficient care and resident safety.” A Republican senator from Nebraska, Deb Fischer, said the rule would “devastate nursing homes across the country and worsen the staffing shortages we are already facing.”

Advocates for nursing home residents have been pressing CMS for years to adopt a higher standard than what it ultimately settled on. A CMS-commissioned study in 2001 found that the quality of care improved with increases of staff up to a level of 4.1 hours per resident per day — nearly a fifth higher than what CMS will require. The consultants CMS hired in preparing its new rules did not incorporate the earlier findings in their evaluation of options.

CMS said the levels it endorsed were more financially feasible for homes, but that assertion didn’t quiet the ongoing battle about how many people are willing to work in homes at current wages and how financially strained homes owners actually are.

“If states do not increase Medicaid payments to nursing homes, facilities are going to close,” said John Bowblis, an economics professor and research fellow with the Scripps Gerontology Center at Miami University. “There aren’t enough workers and there are shortages everywhere. When you have a 3% to 4% unemployment rate, where are you going to get people to work in nursing homes?”

Researchers, however, have been skeptical that all nursing homes are as broke as the industry claims or as their books show. A study published in March by the National Bureau of Economic Research estimated that 63% of profits were secretly siphoned to owners through inflated rents and other fees paid to other companies owned by the nursing homes’ investors.

Charlene Harrington, a professor emeritus at the nursing school of the University of California-San Francisco, said: “In their unchecked quest for profits, the nursing home industry has created its own problems by not paying adequate wages and benefits and setting heavy nursing workloads that cause neglect and harm to residents and create an unsatisfactory and stressful work environment.”

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

Related Topics

Contact Us

Submit a Story Tip