|
In 2003, Congress authorized a new kind of private Medicare Advantage (MA) plan
called a Special Needs Plan (SNP). SNPs differ from regular private MA
plans in that they are intended to enroll, exclusively or disproportionately,
only specific high-needs subpopulations of the Medicare population. Such
focused enrollment is prohibited for regular MA plans.
SNPs operate with few requirements from the law or from the Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services (CMS). CMS does not define key terms, allowing SNPs to
operate without standards. Nor does CMS collect meaningful data on the
services SNPs provide, allowing SNPs to operate without oversight of how or
whether they deliver what they promise. The Secretary of Health and Human
Services is required to report to Congress by December 31, 2007 about the impact
of SNPs on the cost and quality of services provided to enrollees, but, to date,
little is known about what SNPs are doing and whether they are meeting the
special needs of the medically complex populations they serve.
The authorization for SNPs ends in December 2008. Below is a brief
description of SNPs and suggested considerations for Congress in its
deliberations concerning whether to extend authorization for SNPs, and, if so,
under what terms and conditions.
What Populations do SNPs Serve?
Three groups are identified in law and regulation as special needs populations:
-
Individuals dually eligible for
Medicare and Medicaid,
-
Individuals residing in specified
institutions for extended periods, and
-
Individuals with a specific
severe or disabling chronic condition identified by the SNP.
The three populations identified are the frailest, sickest, and most disabled
Medicare beneficiaries. They are also the highest users of health care
services. Dually eligible people, for example, use 24% of all Medicare
dollars, but represent only 16% of the Medicare population. While dual
eligibles are a separate population for purposes of designing a SNP, the other
two populations include many dual eligibles as well.
How Have SNPs Grown Since Their Inception?
The number of SNPs providing services to Medicare beneficiaries has grown
exponentially between 2004, their first year of operation, and 2007, due in part
to the revenue they generate for plans. In 2004, 11 SNPs were approved by
CMS. In 2007, 476 SNPs were approved, enrolling over 800,000
beneficiaries. This represents an increase in plans of over 4000% in four
years. The breakdown for 2007, for different types of SNPs, is:
-
For dually eligible people:
321 plans serving 621,986 enrollees
-
For institutionalized people:
84 plans serving 139,761 enrollees
-
For people with chronic
conditions: 71 plans serving 81,093 enrollees
What is, and is Not, Required of an MA Plan to be a SNP?
A SNP must be a “coordinated care” plan, either a Health Maintenance
Organization (HMO) or Preferred Provider Organization (PPO), not a Private
Fee-for-Service or Medicare Savings Account plan. Unlike other MA HMOs and
PPOs, a SNP must provide coverage for Part D, as well as for Parts A and B.
Beginning in 2008, SNPs must also state what their “model of care” is; however
CMS imposes no requirements for either the content or the performance of the
models of care. CMS imposes no other requirements on SNPs. Since
SNPs began operating in 2004, CMS has taken no action to enforce any obligations
that SNPs meet the special care needs of their members.
Plans serving dual eligibles (regardless of whether they are considered Dual
Eligible SNPs) are not required to coordinate care and payments between
their members’ Medicare and Medicaid coverage, even though the lack of both care
coordination and integration of payment systems are the structural “gaps” that
promote fragmentation in care for dual eligibles. Plans are also not
required to include Medicaid providers in their plan networks, or to inform
enrollees of their Medicaid coverage and how to access it.
How are SNPs paid?
SNPs are paid just like other private MA plans: through a monthly amount
per beneficiary that is “risk adjusted” to reflect the likely utilization of
services of each enrollee. All MA plans receive “bonus” payments for their
enrollees who are dual eligibles or institutionalized. As a result,
because nearly all SNP members, by definition, fit these categories, SNPs
receive a higher average payment than regular MA plans.
What are Considerations for the SNP Reauthorization Debate?
·
SNPs should be offering care and services that are better at
meeting their members’ medically complex “special needs” than what is offered by
traditional Medicare or by a regular MA plan.
o
What is, and what should be, required of plans applying to be
SNPs? What standards exist and what are needed to measure SNP performance?
·
Many of the needs of dually eligible beneficiaries that are not
included in Medicare are covered by their state Medicaid program.
o
What additional services are Medicare SNPs providing that are not
already covered by traditional Medicare and by Medicaid?
o
How can any SNP with dually eligible members provide better care
if SNPs are not required to ensure that care is coordinated with their members
Medicaid coverage or to include Medicaid providers in its network?
·
Individuals eligible for an institutionalized SNP may reside in
institutions that are not subject to Medicare payments, such as Intermediate
Care Facilities for people with Mental Retardation, nursing facilities, or in
home or community-based settings where they receive primarily Medicaid services.
o
How can an institutionalized SNP add value for these populations?
·
SNPs should be improving beneficiaries’ access to primary care and
services and to other providers they need, including specialists and social
services.
o
How do SNPs guarantee that care coordination services already in
place will continue after enrollment?
o
How do SNPs guarantee that members continue to receive services
from trusted providers?
·
Adequate information should be communicated to potential SNP
enrollees and members about all that is or is not covered by the SNP and about
how accessing services through the SNP differs from accessing services through
Original Medicare or through other Medicare Advantage plans.
o
Do SNPs accurately explain the interaction between Medicare
coverage available through the SNP and Medicaid?
Conclusion
Medicare Special Needs Plans have been a costly addition to Medicare.
Because they serve populations whose complex care needs have been a challenge to
health care policy makers and providers for decades, it is hard not to conclude
that their exponential growth is due more to their generation of revenue than to
their success at meeting the challenge of the populations they are intended to
serve. Special Needs Plans need to be carefully examined to ensure that any
additional costs associated with them translate into valuable additional
coverage for the populations they purport to serve. |