Eligibility Levels for Pregnancy-Related Coverage in Medicaid and CHIP
/in Policy Featured News Home, Maps CHIP, Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, Eligibility and Enrollment, Eligibility and Enrollment, Health Coverage and Access, Health Equity, Infant Mortality, Integrated for Pregnant/Parenting Women, Maternal Health and Mortality, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Medicaid Expansion, Medicaid Managed Care, Population Health, State Insurance Marketplaces /by Anita CardwellEligibility Levels for Pregnancy-Related Coverage in Medicaid and CHIP
Michigan’s Caring for Students Program Leverages Medicaid Funding to Expand School Behavioral Health Services
/in Policy Michigan Blogs, Featured News Home Behavioral/Mental Health and SUD, Children/Youth with Special Health Care Needs, Children/Youth with Special Health Care Needs, Chronic and Complex Populations, Eligibility and Enrollment, Health Coverage and Access, Health Equity, Integrated Care for Children, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Medicaid Managed Care, Physical and Behavioral Health Integration, Population Health, Quality and Measurement, Safety Net Providers and Rural Health, Social Determinants of Health /by Anita Cardwell and Gia GouldDespite a federal rule change that allows states to bill Medicaid for school-based physical and behavioral health services provided to all Medicaid-enrolled students, many states struggle to overcome the persistent and complex billing challenges associated with receiving Medicaid reimbursement for delivery of these critical services.
To access additional Medicaid funds to expand school-based behavioral health services, Michigan established the Caring 4 Students (C4S) program, which strengthens partnerships between its Medicaid agency, providers, and educational entities and streamlines Medicaid billing policies and procedures. This case study explores how Michigan overcame some of the challenges states face when seeking Medicaid reimbursement for school-based behavioral health services. It also describes how Michigan retooled the C4S program during the pandemic to ensure the services continued to reach students through telehealth.
Introduction
The majority of children who receive behavioral health care access these services in school settings. According to the School-Based Health Alliance, 70 percent of children who receive mental health services access them at school.[1] As an increasing number of children experience worsening behavioral health due to the pandemic,[2] the need for these support services is even greater. Also, with the pandemic forcing many schools to offer reduced in-person teaching or fully remote learning, they have had to adapt and provide more behavioral health services through telehealth.
While states can fund school-based behavioral health services in a variety of ways, a number of states have leveraged federal Medicaid dollars to help fund behavioral health services for students with Medicaid coverage. In federal fiscal year 2016, estimated Medicaid spending for both school-based and administrative services totaled $4.5 billion.[3]
Historically, schools were restricted in their ability to receive federal Medicaid reimbursement for physical and behavioral health services provided to Medicaid-enrolled students. The “free care rule” prohibited schools from seeking Medicaid payments for services provided to Medicaid-enrolled students if the services were provided for free to all students, such as no-cost health screenings. While the rule contained an exception for services identified in Medicaid-enrolled students’ Individuals Education Plans (IEPs), it limited schools’ ability to obtain Medicaid reimbursement for services provided to students with Medicaid coverage who did not have IEPs. However, as a result of the “free care rule” policy reversal in 2014, states have the opportunity to bill Medicaid for physical and behavioral health services delivered to all Medicaid-enrolled students, including students without IEPs.
Despite the rule change, some schools still face challenges in obtaining Medicaid reimbursement for services provided to Medicaid enrollees, either due to state-level policy barriers or other issues, such as the administrative complexity of the billing process. School staff often may not have the expertise or resources to implement Medicaid billing procedures, and often need assistance and training from state education and Medicaid agencies.[4] Also, some states with budgets impacted by the pandemic may be limited in their ability to invest in an expansion of services.
Development of C4S
To help increase students’ access to behavioral health services, in 2019 Michigan capitalized on the flexibility provided by the reversal of the free care rule by creating the C4S program through a state plan amendment (SPA) that leverages the Early, Periodic, Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment (EPSDT) benefit. Through the C4S program, Michigan schools can now receive Medicaid reimbursement for services delivered to Medicaid-eligible students if they are covered under EPSDT, delivered within a provider’s scope of practice, and billed in accordance with state Medicaid billing procedures.[5]
In addition to federal Medicaid dollars, implementation of the C4S program was bolstered by state funding,[6] which included a $16.5 million allocation by the state legislature in the fall of 2018 to provide direct medical services to students that must be billed to Medicaid whenever possible. State officials subsequently acted quickly to submit a Medicaid SPA by December 2018, and after approval by federal officials, the state launched the C4S program in October 2019.
Interagency Coordination
Nearly all 587 school districts in Michigan fall under the authority of an intermediate school district (ISD), which conducts various administrative functions for the schools. Michigan has 56 ISDs, as well as two independent school districts, and the ISD system structure allows all schools, regardless of how small they are, to participate in the C4S program because the reimbursement claims are administered by the ISDs. The state considers the ISDs to be the main provider entities within the C4S program, as clinicians participating in the program report their services under each ISD’s provider identifier number.
State officials characterize the C4S program as a three-legged stool – consisting of Medicaid, the ISDs and the Michigan Department of Education (MDE) – all closely coordinating together to support the behavioral health needs of students. Even prior to the reversal of the free care rule, Michigan ISDs worked closely with the state Medicaid agency to provide IEP services for Medicaid-enrolled students. The strong relationship between Medicaid and the ISDs can be credited, in part, to a payment agreement that provides ISDs with 60 percent of federal Medicaid reimbursement for school-based services. To provide schools the support needed to manage the service expansion through C4S, ISDs receive 95 percent of the federal share for services covered under the program and the state Medicaid agency receives the remaining five percent to cover administrative costs.
Challenges and Solutions
Lack of behavioral health providers: In addition to expanding the scope of Medicaid reimbursable health and behavioral health services, the C4S program also expanded the type of providers who can claim reimbursement for delivering services to Medicaid-enrolled students. While funding from the legislature allowed the state to hire new mental health staff, the C4S program still needed additional providers because similar to many states, Michigan was already facing shortages within its mental health workforce.
In response, Michigan’s Medicaid officials employed a creative approach to ensure there were enough providers to support the expansion of school behavioral health services. Recognizing the potential of utilizing other categories of providers, such as physician assistants, nurse practitioners, behavior analysts, and marriage and family therapists, state officials incorporated them and others into the list of allowable providers. Including these additional provider types expanded the behavioral health workforce pool and helped the state address the lack of providers, particularly in rural areas of the state.
Overall complexity of reimbursement process: State Medicaid agency officials indicated that some school districts were initially hesitant to participate in the C4S program because they were concerned about the potential administrative burden that might be involved with implementing the Medicaid reimbursement process. These concerns have been addressed by establishing strong communication channels among the three entities (Medicaid, ISDs, and MDE) to clarify processes and procedures and provide ample opportunities for staff training sessions.
Given the complexity of the reimbursement process, the state Medicaid agency works particularly closely with the ISDs to provide them with answers to specific questions. Training on implementing the reimbursement processes occurs frequently, both at an annual conference and on a regular basis because of the frequency of staff turnover in the schools and consequently the need to train new employees about the procedures and how to account for time spent providing services.
One key aspect of the Medicaid reimbursement model is that the state uses a process that is based on paying for part of the salary of a particular staff position, rather than reimbursing for the actual services themselves. Given that providers do not spend all of their time engaging in reimbursable activities, in order to determine the amount of their salaries that can be reimbursed by Medicaid, state officials must estimate the portion of time they spent on providing medically eligible services to Medicaid-enrolled children. To do this, each month state officials ask for responses to a Random Moment Time Study (RMTS), which is a federally approved method to assess how providers spend their time. The RMTS data is incorporated into an algorithm containing a number of other factors, and this calculation forms the basis of the Medicaid reimbursement model.
State officials reported there are still some challenges associated with helping providers understand how to evaluate their time spent providing services when they respond to requests for RMTS data, due to some providers’ lack of familiarity with the RMTS process as well as the accelerated pace of implementation of the C4S program. However, state officials indicated that they expect these issues can be addressed with additional training.
Provider and general reimbursement issues: One challenge the state encountered during the initial stages of C4S implementation was due to an existing rule within MDE, which stipulated that if a provider’s salary was partially funded by general education dollars that individual was not permitted to work with special education students. State Medicaid officials worked with MDE to eliminate that rule, and this has resulted in the ability to more effectively and efficiently allocate providers’ time and allow them to serve more students.
Another key to the state’s success in increasing Medicaid reimbursement for behavioral health services provided in the schools was to address the reimbursement rate applied to school psychologists. There are four different pools of staff providers serving students — direct services staff, personal care services staff, targeted case management staff, and administrative and outreach staff. Prior to implementation of C4S, the school psychologists were categorized as part of the administrative outreach pool, resulting in a low Medicaid reimbursement rate. State officials were able to work with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to change that designation so they were instead recognized as part of the direct service staff pool, which significantly increased their reimbursement rates.
Michigan state officials also anticipated a potential administrative challenge related to provider reimbursement. If the state used two separate Medicaid state plans to implement the program — one for special education students and another for general education students — this would create reimbursement complications because it would silo providers into serving only one student population group. By instead submitting a SPA for the C4S program that added in coverage of the general education students, this allowed providers to serve both groups of students. The state also worked closely with CMS on the overall reimbursement methodology to maximize the program’s potential for leveraging federal Medicaid funds, which included keeping the students with IEPs separate from the general education students in the state’s calculations because of their differing Medicaid eligibility rates.
Transition to online school services due to COVID-19: Michigan officials had to quickly adjust policies and processes in response to the statewide shift to online learning in the spring of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. State officials had heard anecdotally about an increased need among students for behavioral health services due to stresses associated with the pandemic, and they anticipate that this demand may continue to grow. Recognizing the need to increase access to behavioral health services for students who may be in crisis, the state waived the requirement that a plan of care must be in place, allowing schools to bill Medicaid up to 30 days without an existing plan of care.
State officials quickly broadened their telehealth policies to include an audio-only provision, and while that will most likely be discontinued when the pandemic ends, they indicated that they plan to sustain many other telehealth provisions post-pandemic.
Also, while telehealth services were implemented fairly rapidly, state officials reported that changing the billing processes was not as easy. School closures caused nearly all RMTS moments to show no reimbursable activity, because providers were not providing medical or behavioral health services during the initial stages of the closure. State officials explained that while this did result in a notable loss in reimbursement, the enhanced Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) provided by the Families First Coronavirus Response Act would help cover much of this decrease. Also, CMS allowed the state to use an average of RMTS responses from the last two quarters for their RMTS when schools were closed, because of the significant declines in time spent providing care, and state officials indicated that federal approval to do this helped significantly.
The state is also seeking to ensure equitable access to behavioral health services by focusing on addressing issues for students who lack access to devices that can be used for telehealth services. State officials recently submitted a SPA to federal officials to obtain reimbursement for providing students in need of devices with access to iPads and computers that would be owned and managed by the schools. They indicated that if the proposal is approved, they plan to continue reimbursing for devices beyond the pandemic period.
Overall successes: The C4S program has not only achieved one of its overall goals of increasing students’ access to behavioral health services, it has also helped bring in needed additional funds to the schools. There had already been some psychologists in the schools, but it was not until implementation of C4S that Michigan was able to obtain Medicaid reimbursement for any qualifying services provided. Also, despite needing to navigate the challenges associated with the pandemic, state officials considered it a success that there has been an approximate 6 percent increase in the amount of federal Medicaid reimbursement being directed to schools through the C4S program.
The Future of C4S
State officials said they anticipate that C4S’ initial successes will continue and that the program will likely expand further, as not all ISDs were able to implement the program fully during its initial stages. As school hiring begins to increase post-pandemic and as providers and ISDs become more familiar with navigating the RMTS responses and overall reimbursement process, state officials indicated they expect the program to grow steadily in the coming months.
Notes
The National Academy for State Health Policy (NASHP) would like to thank state officials from Michigan for their time and contribution to this publication. Support for this work was provided by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the foundation.
[1] Mental Health webpage on the School-Based Health Alliance webpage, https://www.sbh4all.org/school-health-care/health-and-learning/mental-health/.
[2] Stephen W. Patrick et al, “Well-being of Parents and Children During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Survey. Pediatrics October 2020, 146(4). https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/146/4/e2020016824
[3] Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (MACPAC), “Medicaid in Schools.” April 2018. https://www.macpac.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Medicaid-in-Schools.pdf
[4] Heather Clapp Padgette, Candace Webb, Phyllis Jordan, “How Medicaid and CHIP Can Support Student Success through Schools.” Georgetown University Center for Children and Families, April 2019. https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2019/04/24/how-medicaid-and-chip-can-support-student-success-through-schools/
[5] While the C4S program serves all students, the state can only receive Medicaid reimbursement for services provided to Medicaid-eligible children. Also, the C4S program also expands school nursing services, but this case study focuses on the program’s behavioral health services.
[6] Also, the non-federal share of Medicaid spending for school-based services is provided by schools through certified public expenditures.
Rhode Island’s Accountable Entities Emphasize Children’s Health and Social Needs
/in Policy Rhode Island Blogs, Featured News Home Chronic and Complex Populations, Eligibility and Enrollment, Eligibility and Enrollment, Health Coverage and Access, Health Equity, Housing and Health, Integrated Care for Children, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Physical and Behavioral Health Integration, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health /by Elinor HigginsIn the midst of the pandemic, many states are continuing to advance their health system transformation efforts. Rhode Island’s Medicaid Accountable Entities (AE) Program, for example, is shifting to a pay-for-performance model for several screening measures. Under this model, there is an additional financial incentive to screen children and their families for health and social needs, which have taken on new importance due to the added stressors of COVID-19.
Rhode Island’s AE program, now entering its fourth year, makes provider organizations (AEs) accountable for health outcomes of their members as well as the total cost of care of their populations. Using contractual levers in the agreements between AEs and managed care organizations (MCOs), the state requires AEs to integrate strategies to address social needs and social determinants of health (SDOH). The strategies must include assessment of social needs, referral to community resources, and utilizing community partnerships and engagement to address the identified needs.
Read NASHP’s 2018 profile of Rhode Island’s Accountable Entities Program here.
The state developed SDOH screening requirements for the AEs. Screening tools must be approved by the Rhode Island Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS), and they must include information on the following domains: housing insecurity, food insecurity, transportation, interpersonal violence, and utility assistance.
Screening for a child’s needs can offer insights about what kinds of services, referrals, or wrap-around care are needed to ensure healthy development. Because the ongoing pandemic has required children and families to stay home and spend additional time together, a safe and supportive home environment is especially crucial for children’s health and well-being. The SDOH screening domains that are required by EOHHS overlap with adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), such as poverty, food and/or housing insecurity, neglect, and mental illness — all of which contribute to poor health outcomes for children.
Rhode Island’s AE program takes into account the benefit of a two-generation (2Gen) approach to these issues. Under a 2Gen framework, services are provided to both children and the adults in their lives simultaneously to help families live healthy and productive lives. When screening children under age 12, Rhode Island’s SDOH screening measure can be applied to an entire household instead of to only the individual child. This can provide a better understanding of how to target interventions for the whole family going forward.
This year, a key change is happening within the AE program that may increase the number of children and families served by the program. The state is shifting to pay-for-performance (P4P) for the SDOH screening requirement. Beginning in Project Year 4 (PY4), there is a financial incentive for the AEs to increase their SDOH screening rates among their attributed populations. AEs needed time to develop their screening tools and build capacity around screening for SDOH before shifting the AE incentive metric to P4P. Other measures, including documented developmental screening for children younger than age 3, will also transition to P4P in PY4.
Though the SDOH screening requirements are specific to Medicaid AEs in Rhode Island, state officials expect the screening requirements to have a ripple effect. In primary care settings, for example, if a provider is administering the SDOH to AE-attributed patients, officials expect they are likely integrating the screening into their workflows and administering it to all of their patients. This has proven to be the case with other well-child practices. For example, the AE Coastal Medical, has implemented universal screenings across all of its practices to assess and identify needs around depression, anxiety, and SDOH.
Screening is only the first step in improving health-related social needs for children and families. One of the goals of the AE program is to use screening results and the improved understanding of its members’ circumstances to improve their overall health. Rhode Island is leveraging its Quality Report System (QRS), a tool for data collection, to calculate performance on the quality measure. This tool enables providers to drill down to the patient level to identify patients still in need of screening.
An upcoming strategy to help AEs coordinate better with community partners is the procurement of a community referral system that would help connect individuals to necessary resources. Such a referral network could be linked with the QRS in the future, making data collection, analysis, and referral a centralized process. Ultimately, this initiative may drive a broader conversation about how the state collects screening data across both public and private payers, and how this data can be used to improve the health outcomes of Rhode Island residents.
Recent State Actions to Address Declining Children’s Insurance Coverage Rates
/in Policy Florida, Georgia, Iowa, New Jersey, Utah Blogs, Featured News Home CHIP, CHIP, Eligibility and Enrollment, Eligibility and Enrollment, Health Coverage and Access, Healthy Child Development, Maternal Health and Mortality, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Medicaid Managed Care /by Gia GouldSince reaching an all-time low in 2016, the rate of uninsured children has climbed from 4.7 percent in 2016 to 5.7 percent in 2019. In response, several state legislatures are considering bills designed to improve children’s coverage options and promote child enrollment in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
Program and Enrollment Expansions
One of the most notable efforts to expand children’s coverage was included in New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy’s fiscal year 2022 budget, which establishes the Cover All Kids initiative to provide coverage to all uninsured children. At an estimated cost of $20 million, it is forecasted to cover 88,000 children by expanding Medicaid eligibility thresholds and extending coverage to children currently ineligible due to immigration status.
The Cover All Kids program aligns with initiatives previously proposed by New Jersey advocates and legislators to ensure all children have coverage. The governor’s proposed budget also directs the Department of Human Services to eliminate premiums and the waiting list for children enrolled in CHIP and provides funds for an enhanced outreach campaign to increase Medicaid and CHIP child enrollment.
In Utah, lawmakers considered two children’s coverage bills during this session. In 2019, Utah had the third-highest increase in the rate of uninsured children and the highest rate of uninsured Latinx children in the country. In response to these troubling statistics, the Utah Legislature passed HB262, which creates the Children’s Health Care Coverage program. This program directs the Utah Department of Health, Department of Workforce Services, and the state Board of Education to develop a program to promote health insurance coverage for children when they enroll in school and when they apply for free and reduced lunch.
The Utah law also requires the state to:
- Conduct research on families who are eligible for Medicaid and CHIP to determine their awareness of coverage options;
- Analyze trends in disenrollment to identify barriers for coverage renewal; and
- Administer surveys to gather information about current enrollees’ experiences with the programs.
Findings from this research will be used to redesign the CHIP and children’s Medicaid enrollment websites and inform future outreach partnerships.
Another Utah bill, SB158, designed to address the state’s coverage crisis through the creation of a robust outreach program, focused on enrolling underserved populations, providing application assistance, and launching an advertising campaign to draw attention to coverage opportunities for children. In addition, the bill would have expanded public coverage to children whose family income fell below 200 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL). Despite senate approval, the bill did not pass.
Like Utah, Florida experienced a dramatic increase in childhood uninsured rates since 2016. The Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University’s Health Policy Institute 2020 report found that more than 55,000 Florida children had lost coverage between 2016 and 2019, representing the second-highest coverage drop in the nation during that period. Florida legislators are currently considering HB 201 and SB 1244, both of which would increase the eligibility threshold for their CHIP program from 200 percent of FPL incrementally by 20 percent each year beginning in the 2021-2022 fiscal year, until reaching 300 percent of FPL, which is expected in the 2026-2027 fiscal year.
In Maine, legislators are considering LD 372, a bill to expand access to CHIP. The bill includes provisions to:
- Expand income eligibility from 200 to 300 percent of FPL;
- Eliminate the waiting period for children whose families have lost employer-sponsored coverage;
- Extend coverage eligibility from age 19 to 20; and
- Eliminate premium payments for all enrollees.
Express-lane eligibility:
Last week, the Georgia Legislature passed HB 163, which directs the Department of Community Health to seek federal approval to establish express-lane-eligibility (ELE) for children whose families apply for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). By implementing the ELE option, children will automatically be enrolled or renewed in Medicaid or the state’s CHIP program, PeachCare for Kids, based on the current information provided in their SNAP application. State child health advocates estimate that this could increase child enrollment in Medicaid in the state by 70,000. Currently, five states use SNAP data to determine eligibility for Medicaid and/or CHIP.
CHIP Buy-in Programs:
Legislators in Iowa and West Virginia are considering bills to create CHIP buy-in programs, which allow families with incomes above their state’s CHIP eligibility thresholds to purchase coverage.
Iowa’s SF220 would allow families to purchase CHIP coverage for children and young adults up to age 26 whose household income exceeds the maximum income eligibility threshold of 302 percent of FPL. Iowa’s CHIP-buy in plan differs from traditional CHIP buy-in programs as it would allow families to purchase CHIP coverage for their children as an alternative to qualified health plans on the exchange or plans on the individual market — which unlike CHIP are not tailored to children’s needs.
The CHIP coverage would be sold through the marketplace, allowing families to compare their coverage options, and could be paid for with premium tax credits for eligible enrollees. If passed, the state would need federal approval to implement the plan.
West Virginia’s HB2278 would establish a buy-in program for children’s whose families earn more than 300 percent of FPL and could afford to pay the cost of CHIP coverage in full.
Despite states continuing to grapple with managing the COVID-19 pandemic, many are still seeking to improve coverage for children in Medicaid and CHIP. The National Academy for State Health Policy continues to track states’ efforts to increase enrollment in children’s coverage in Medicaid and CHIP.
State Medicaid and CHIP Strategies to Protect Coverage during COVID-19
/in COVID-19 State Action Center Charts, Featured News Home CHIP, CHIP, COVID-19, Eligibility and Enrollment, Eligibility and Enrollment, Essential Health Benefits, Health Coverage and Access, Health Equity, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Population Health /by Gia GouldNASHP Roundtable: Georgia and Illinois Work to Improve Maternal Health Outcomes
/in Policy Georgia, Illinois Blogs, Featured News Home Eligibility and Enrollment, Health Coverage and Access, Health Equity, Infant Mortality, Integrated for Pregnant/Parenting Women, Maternal Health and Mortality, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Medicaid Managed Care, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health /by NASHP StaffIn partnership with the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, the National Academy for State Health Policy (NASHP) recently held a virtual roundtable discussion of state officials to discuss maternal health initiatives in Illinois and Georgia and explore strategies to improve maternal health outcomes for Medicaid enrollees.
Despite spending more than other developed nations on hospital-provided maternity care, about 700 US women die each year from pregnancy-related complications.
- Women of color have significantly higher rates of maternal morbidity and mortality, and Black women are approximately four-times more likely than White women to die of pregnancy-related causes.
- In comparison to women covered by private insurance, pregnant women enrolled in Medicaid have increased rates of severe maternal morbidity and mortality and are more likely to have risk factors affecting their pregnancies.
In addition to tracking states’ initiatives to expand postpartum Medicaid coverage, NASHP offers a range of resources related to maternal health and healthy child development.
To view more materials from the roundtable, view this slide deck.
One approach proposed by a number of states is extending Medicaid postpartum coverage for women beyond the current 60-day period. As highlighted in NASHP’s interactive map and chart, Each State’s Efforts to Extend Medicaid Coverage to Postpartum Women, 23 states and Washington, DC have initiated efforts to extend postpartum coverage, and currently four states are in the process of seeking federal approval to do so through a Section 1115 demonstration waiver.
Georgia’s Extension of Postpartum Coverage
Georgia is one of those states and the state’s Medicaid director explained during the discussion that they are planning to submit a waiver proposal to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in December to extend postpartum coverage there. The state’s efforts began in 2010 when Georgia was ranked 50th in the nation for maternal mortality rates. Officials first formed an advisory committee to focus on the issue. As they examined specific maternal mortality data and rates, Georgia found that close to 60 percent of the maternal deaths were actually preventable. In 2019, the Georgia House passed a resolution to create a committee to study maternal mortality, which led directly to the state’s current efforts to pursue an extension of postpartum Medicaid coverage.
While Georgia’s study committee initially suggested extending postpartum coverage for 12 months, due to budget constraints the state was unable to pursue that recommendation. Instead, the state opted to seek extended coverage for individuals with income up to 225 percent of the federal poverty level for four months, which when added to Medicaid’s 60-day postpartum coverage period, will provide a total of six months (180 days) of coverage postpartum. Overall, the state legislature allocated $59 million for the proposed five-year demonstration project.
Services under the extended postpartum coverage will be provided through managed care, and after Medicaid’s 60-day postpartum period, individuals will be seamlessly transferred to coverage under the waiver. During the first year, the state anticipates that there will be approximately 151,000 enrollees, and it is expected that enrollment will grow to about 186,000 by the final year of the demonstration.
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois Pilot Program
The discussion also featured maternal and child health improvement initiatives in Medicaid that Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois (BCBSIL) is currently pursuing. BCBSIL is conducting a 12-month, multi-pronged pilot program in partnership with community organizations and medical providers that is designed to address factors that negatively impact health outcomes in the maternal and child population. The goals of the pilot program are to reduce the number of elective, non-medically necessary Caesarian sections (C-sections) and newborn intensive care unit (NICU) admissions, as well as improve Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) rates in both prenatal visits and child immunizations.
Under the pilot program’s first goal of reducing unnecessary C-sections, BCBSIL plans to enhance care coordination efforts between providers, Medicaid agencies, and community organizations. As part of its second goal to improve prenatal and postpartum care visit rates, BCBSIL will target efforts in areas of Illinois with high rates of maternal and child health disparities. Within these regions, BCBSIL will identify at least three obstetrics practices that are willing to partner with BCBSIL. These providers will be connected with BCBS care coordinators to help ensure access to care delivery resources, because often providers lack the capacity to provide social service referrals for their members. BCBS enrollees will also have the opportunity to engage in an incentive program that will offer rewards for completion of prenatal care visits.
In addition to promoting better maternal health outcomes, the BCBSIL pilot program is also working to improve pediatric immunization and dental care rates. Through partnerships with Chicago public schools and community organizations, the pilot program will disseminate information about the importance of immunizations and preventive dental care and also create a referral system for children in need of these services and other preventive health care. The planning phases of the pilot program began this fall, and the initiative will continue through the end of 2021.
Along with tracking states’ initiatives to expand postpartum Medicaid coverage, NASHP has a wide range of resources related to maternal health and healthy child development, and will be continuing to follow states’ efforts to improve maternal and child health outcomes.
The online meeting and this blog were sponsored by Blue Cross Blue Shield Association,
with content development at the sole discretion of NASHP. To view a slide deck highlighting materials from the online meeting, please click here.
How New York Is Safeguarding Pregnant Women during the COVID-19 Pandemic
/in Policy Blogs, Featured News Home Care Coordination, Chronic and Complex Populations, COVID-19, Eligibility and Enrollment, Health Equity, Infant Mortality, Integrated for Pregnant/Parenting Women, Maternal Health and Mortality, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Physical and Behavioral Health Integration, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health /by Taylor PlattA Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study published in September found that pregnant women, especially Black and Latinx, are at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19 compared to non-pregnant individuals. They are more likely to be admitted to intensive care units (ICU), receive invasive ventilation, and are at increased risk of death.
In response to COVID-19, several states, including New York, are working closely with the CDC to collect data on COVID-19 and pregnancy and implement guidelines to improve women’s outcomes and address disparities. Earlier this year, the New York COVID-19 Maternity Task Force submitted a report with recommendations to the governor, who is now implementing these actions.
Background
At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, little was known about the impact of the disease on pregnant women. CDC and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) have been monitoring data about pregnant women infected with the coronavirus and publishing updated guidance as new information comes to light. Recently, the CDC determined that pregnant women are at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19. In response, last April New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo formed the COVID-19 Maternity Task Force.
In a recent report, the CDC summarized maternal and birth outcomes of hospitalized pregnant women with confirmed COVID-19. Between March and August, 598 hospitalized pregnant women tested positive for COVID-19:
- Approximately 55 percent were asymptomatic at the time of admission;
- 42.5 percent self-identified as Hispanic or Latino;
- 26.5 percent were non-Hispanic Black; and
- 20.6 percent had at least one underlying condition – asthma and hypertension were the most prevalent.
Additionally, symptomatic pregnant women were at an increased risk for ICU admission and mechanical ventilation. This new data continues to highlight how COVID-19 disproportionally impacts Black and Latinx populations and has implications for providing care to pregnant women during the pandemic.
New York’s Actions
New York’s COVID-19 Maternity Task Force report includes the following recommendations:
- Diversify birthing site options to support patient choice to deliver at a hospital or a birthing center;
- Authorize at least one support person to accompany an individual during labor, delivery, and recovery;
- Universally test all pregnant patients for COVID-19;
- Ensure equity by continuing to engage community members and community-based organizations;
- Increase messaging and education of pregnant patients about COVID-19 and perinatal care; and
- Encourage the New York State Department of Health to continue collaborating with academic institutions, regional perinatal centers, and medical organizations to review the impact that COVID-19 has on pregnancy and newborns.
Gov. Cuomo accepted all of the task force’s recommendations and New York’s Department of Health (DOH) has begun to implement the recommendations. The original executive order issued in March addressing having support people present during labor has been amended to include support during labor, delivery, and recovery, and now includes doulas as part of the care team.
Following the task force recommendations, hospital and health systems have rolled out universal COVID-19 testing for pregnant women, and DOH has approved two new temporary birthing centers as a result of the streamlined process to establish additional birthing centers during the pandemic. DOH will continue to accept applications for midwifery birth centers and provide emergency approvals during the public health emergency to ensure access to safe perinatal care and provide a variety of birthing options to parents.
DOH partnered with the University at Albany School of Public Health to conduct an early literature review on the impact of COVID 19 and pregnancy. Results were shared with staff from regional perinatal centers across the state for feedback and discussion. The final version of the literature review was posted on the New York State Perinatal Quality Collaborative website in June 2020.
The New York State Perinatal Quality Collaborative, in partnership with the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology District II, hosted statewide interactive webinars on obstetrical care and implicit bias within the context of the COVID-19. Educational webinars related to the management of pregnant people during the COVID-19 pandemic featured state obstetric leaders sharing their experiences, successes, and challenges related to treating pregnant and postpartum people during the COVID-19 pandemic. Webinar participants were able to submit questions during the live event or prior to the event by email. In addition to the obstetric-focused webinars, the collaborative also hosted a neonatal-focused webinar relating to COVID-19 that addressed the testing and care of newborns. All webinars were recorded and each has been posted on the public section of the collaborative’s website.
Resources to Improve Maternity Care during COVID-19
Throughout its response to COVID-19, New York’s DOH has been committed to promoting health equity, especially as it relates to maternity care. It convened a workgroup that included community members to provide input and oversight into the development of education and messaging materials related to COVID-19, which is under development. A webinar conducted in partnership with the collaborative. on COVID-19 and Maternal Equity was held on June 5, 2020. This webinar features a panel discussion of maternity and racial justice experts led by Joia Crear-Perry, MD, FACOG, of the National Birth Equity Collaborative on the impact of COVID-19 on the birth equity and included stories of lived experience shared by a Rochester mother who had given birth during the pandemic and a community health worker supporting pregnant women in the Bronx.
As states continue to confront COVID-19 and its impact on health care delivery, it will be important for states to consider new CDC data on pregnant women and best practices for how to protect women and children, especially pregnant women of color. The National Academy of State Health Policy will continue to track state actions on COVID-19 and pregnant women. For more information on COVID-19 and pregnancy explore this NASHP Infographic: How State Medicaid Programs Can Use Telehealth to Serve Pregnant Women during COVID-19 and blog, States Implement Strategies to Safeguard Pregnant Women during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
States Invited to Join a Community of Practice to Improve Immunization Rates
/in Policy Blogs, Featured News Home CHIP, CHIP, Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, Eligibility and Enrollment, EPSDT, Health Coverage and Access, Immunization, Integrated Care for Children, Integrated for Pregnant/Parenting Women, Maternal Health and Mortality, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Medicaid Managed Care, Population Health /by NASHP StaffThe National Academy for State Health Policy (NASHP) and AcademyHealth are seeking five to seven states to join a community of practice focused on improving immunizations rates.
To apply, complete an expression of interest form by Dec. 10, 2020.
Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cooperative agreement entitled Eliminating Barriers to Immunization through Collaborative Use of State Agency Resources, each state’s community of practice will be comprised of a multidisciplinary team, including a Medicaid medical or policy director, an immunization state program manager, and a state immunization information system coordinator.
Through virtual and in-person engagement over the course of the three-year project, NASHP and AcademyHealth will work with states to identify immunization barriers and share promising practices for increasing immunization rates for children and pregnant women enrolled in Medicaid.
If a state’s Medicaid agency is interested in joining this community of practice, please send an email to Sunita Krishnan (Sunita.Krishnan@academyhealth.org ) with a completed expression of interest form by Dec. 10, 2020.
Explore NASHP’s State Immunization Services and Policies Resource Page for more resources.
State Strategies to Address the Black Maternal Health Crisis
/in Policy Blogs, Featured News Home Eligibility and Enrollment, Eligibility and Enrollment, Essential Health Benefits, Health Coverage and Access, Infant Mortality, Integrated for Pregnant/Parenting Women, Maternal Health and Mortality, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Medicaid Managed Care /by Taylor Platt, Eddy Fernandez and Carrie HanlonThe inequities laid bare by COVID-19 underscore the importance of states’ efforts to develop policies and interventions to address all health disparities. Systemic racism, a driver of these inequities, also fuels disparities in maternal morbidity and mortality – Black women are four-times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than White women.
States are on the frontlines, working to improve maternal health outcomes and address racial disparities through strategies such as work force development, implementing policies to dismantle structural racism and address its consequences, extending postpartum coverage, collecting stratified data, and implementing quality improvement initiatives. States have developed several strategic approaches to address maternal health disparities.
Maternal Mortality Review Committees are multidisciplinary groups in states and cities comprised of health officials, obstetric, gynecological, and maternal-fetal medicine specialists, behavioral health providers, hospital association leaders, and community-based organization representatives. Cases of maternal mortality are identified in partnership with the committee, the state’s vital records office, and epidemiologists to determine whether each death was pregnancy-related and what factors contributed to the death. The data produced by these boards, often stratified by race and ethnicity, is crucial for identifying causes and for tailoring policy solutions at the state and local level. The Louisiana Pregnancy-Associated Mortality Review (LA-PAMR) recently published a new report outlining policy recommendations for changes at the structural, hospital, provider, and patient level. One of five recommendations the committee made is to identify and address racial and cultural biases across the network of care that serves pregnant and postpartum women, as well as in institutions that influence or coordinate with that network (e.g., public health and Medicaid).
Perinatal Quality Collaboratives (PQCs) are state or multi-state networks comprised of perinatal health care providers and public health professionals, such as pediatricians, obstetricians, and midwives. These collaboratives work to improve maternal and infant health by identifying health care processes that require quality improvement and offering expertise to improve these processes. Many PQCs are currently focusing on reducing racial, ethnic, and geographic disparities in health outcomes, improving identification of and care for infants with neonatal abstinence syndrome due to maternal substance abuse, and reducing preterm births. The California Perinatal Quality Collaborative (CPQC) was the founding organization of the state’s maternal mortality review committee and has multiple quality improvement projects underway that focus on health disparities, for example in preterm birth and low birthweight in newborns, and women and substance use during pregnancy. In 2018, CPQC launched the Health Equity Taskforce to achieve and improve outcomes for newborns and their families. Additional information on specific state collaboratives can be found at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s webpage on perinatal collaboratives.
Person-centered maternal care models are strategies states can implement to provide high-quality care to pregnant women. Care coordination for pregnant women can help increase access and utilization of health care services and improve maternal and infant health outcomes
One care coordination model is Community Care of North Carolina’s Pregnancy Medical Home (PMH). PMHs in general provide evidence-based, high-quality care to patients and focus care management resources on pregnant women who are deemed high-risk. State Medicaid agencies are increasingly developing and deploying non-licensed, non-master’s-level treatment and support providers, such as peers and counselors, to provide a range of services to address the factors affecting maternal health. These peer support services and community-based teams are additional resources that can help improve maternity care while also addressing other social determinants of health. North Carolina and Wisconsin both have implemented the PMH model to deliver services to pregnant women.
Supporting doula services for pregnant women is another approach many states and the federal government are considering to address disparities in maternal health outcomes. A doula is a “trained professional who provides continuous physical, emotional, and informational support to a mother before, during, and shortly after childbirth to help her achieve the healthiest, most satisfying experience possible.” Currently, two states, Minnesota and Oregon, cover doula services for pregnant women enrolled in Medicaid. Doulas can improve overall health outcomes for and reduce disparities among pregnant women, for example by lowering the rates of cesarean sections and preterm births. For more information on financing doula services, read the National Academy for State Health Policy (NASHP) report, Four State Strategies to Employ Doulas to Improve Maternal Health and Birth Outcomes in Medicaid.
Postpartum Medicaid Coverage Extensions: Lapses in insurance coverage or losing insurance coverage during the postpartum period can disrupt care and result in untreated and serious health threats. More than half of pregnancy-related deaths occur during the postpartum period, and currently under federal law, pregnancy-related Medicaid coverage ends 60 days after delivery. To promote continuity of coverage and care and address maternal morbidity and mortality, many states, such as Illinois and Missouri, are turning to 1115 demonstration waivers to extend Medicaid coverage and certain benefits beyond 60 days postpartum. In one case, California used state funds to extend Medicaid coverage for women with postpartum depression. Policy options to extend Medicaid coverage can be especially beneficial for women of color, who are more likely to experience higher rates of no insurance coverage than White, non-Latinx women. For more information about this topic, explore NASHP’s interactive map highlighting States’ Efforts to Extend Medicaid Coverage to Postpartum Women.
NASHP will continue to track state efforts to address the impact of systemic racism on maternal and infant health and document how states are working to advance maternal health equity by implementing alternative payment models, addressing social determinants of health, expanding telehealth, partnering with community-based organizations, and improving data collection to improve maternal health outcomes broadly and during COVID-19.
Sign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter
Sign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter
Washington, DC Office:
1233 20th St., N.W., Suite 303Washington, DC 20036
p: (202) 903-0101
f: (202) 903-2790
Contact Us
Phone: 202-903-0101

For individuals living with complex, often chronic conditions, and their families, palliative care can provide relief from symptoms, improve satisfaction and outcomes, and help address critical mental and spiritual needs during difficult times. Now more than ever, there is growing recognition of the importance of palliative care services for individuals with serious illness, such as advance care planning, pain and symptom management, care coordination, and team-based, multi-disciplinary support. These services can help patients and families cope with the symptoms and stressors of disease, better anticipate and avoid crises, and reduce unnecessary and/or unwanted care. While this model is grounded in evidence that demonstrates improved quality of life, better outcomes, and reduced cost for patients, only a fraction of individuals who could benefit from palliative care receive it. 























































































































































