Insurance, Health

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. Appendix B: Site Visit Discussion Guide

Site Visits to FEHB Health Plans Conducted through a contract between the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and in conjunction with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management; and subcontracts between ROW Sciences and the University of Maryland School of Medicine, RAND Health, Harvar

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. Notes

Ms. Blasinsky is now at CSR, Inc. Dr. Patton is now at Westat. Dr. Barry is now at Yale University School of Medicine. While at ASPE, Dr. Hennessy initiated the evaluation and served as the initial Government Project Officer. Dr. Hennessy is now at SAMHSA. The PERT term general medical care is used in this paper to dis

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. References

Ai, C., & Norton, E. C. (2003). Interaction Terms in Logit and Probit Models. Economic Letters (80): 123-129. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. (1993). Depression in primary care: volume 2. Treatment of major depression . Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. (

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. Impact on Access to Care, Service Use, and Cost

Implementing parity required changing the nominal benefits for coverage of treating mental health and substance abuse (MH/SA) disorders. The dimensions of the nominal benefit that are most often affected when parity policies are implemented are:

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. FEHB Network Providers’ Experience Implementing Parity

Provider focus groups were conducted to assess providers’ awareness and perceptions of the parity benefit implementation. Each focus group was audiotaped and verbatim transcripts prepared from these tapes. The transcripts were then systematically analyzed for key themes. Key Research Questions PERT researchers developed a discussion guide fo

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. Structural Changes to Plan Benefits

PERT researchers acquired nominal plan benefits information on the 304 FEHB plans with available benefit design information and participating in the FEHB in 1999, the baseline year of the evaluation. This information was obtained from the OPM website for all four years of the evaluation (1999-2002). To compile information on benefits in each of

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. State Experiences with Parity

A series of efforts at parity legislation has also occurred at the State level (Hennessy and Stephens, 1997). Some States target their parity legislation narrowly to include only people with severe mental disorders, while others cover a broader range of mental illnesses that may also include substance abuse disorders. Experiences with parity polic

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. History of Mental Health Benefits and Parity Experiences in the Federal Government

Federal Legislative Trends Affecting Parity in Mental Health Insurance Coverage Although Federal legislative initiatives on parity in mental health insurance coverage dates from the 1960s, the 1996 Mental Health Parity Act represents the first Federal parity legislation. Implemented in 1998, this legislation focused on only one aspect of the dif

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. I. Background to the Policy of Parity

In a speech in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on April 29, 2002, announcing the creation of the President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, President George W. Bush reiterated the importance of mental health parity. President Bush said, “Americans with mental illness…deserve a health care system that treats their illness with the same urg

Evaluation of Parity in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Final Report. Background

President Bush has often pointed to the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program as a model for health insurance. The FEHB Program is the largest employer-sponsored health insurance program in the Nation, serving more than 8 million Federal employees, their dependents, and retirees. The U. S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) administer

Persons With Mental Retardation and Related Conditions in Mental Retardation Facilities: Selected Findings from the 1987 National Medical Expenditure Survey. Recent Research

Despite the many limitations that can be noted about the federal commitment to data gathering on persons with mental retardation and related conditions in institutional settings, there have been a number of useful recent sources of national statistics, all conducted or substantially supported by Federal government agencies. The most significant an

Value of Health Insurance: Few of the Uninsured Have Adequate Resources to Pay Potential Hospital Bills

From: Value of Health Insurance: Few of the Uninsured Have Adequate Resources to Pay Potential Hospital Bills

rb.pdf
PDF

Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. Final Privacy Rule Preamble.. History of the Privacy Component of the Administrative Simplification Provisions

The Congress addressed the opportunities and challenges presented by the rapid evolution of health information systems in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), Public Law 104-191, which was enacted on August 21, 1996. Sections 261 through 264 of HIPAA are known as the Administrative Simplification provisions.

Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. Final Privacy Rule Preamble.. The Federal Response

There have been numerous federal initiatives aimed at protecting the privacy of especially sensitive personal information over the past several years -- and several decades. While the rules below are likely the largest single federal initiative to protect privacy, they are by no means alone in the field. Rather, the rules arrive in the context of

Breaches of Health Privacy Harm More than Our

Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. Final Privacy Rule Preamble.. Breaches of Health Privacy Harm More than Our Health Status

A breach of a person's health privacy can have significant implications well beyond the physical health of that person, including the loss of a job, alienation of family and friends, the loss of health insurance, and public humiliation. For example:

Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. Final Privacy Rule Preamble.. The Changing Health Care System

The number of entities who are maintaining and transmitting individually identifiable health information has increased significantly over the last 10 years. In addition, the rapid growth of integrated health care delivery systems requires greater use of integrated health information systems. The health care industry has been transformed from one t

Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. Final Privacy Rule Preamble.. Advances in Genetic Sciences

Recently, scientists completed nearly a decade of work unlocking the mysteries of the human genome, creating tremendous new opportunities to identify and prevent many of the leading causes of death and disability in this country and around the world. Yet the absence of privacy protections for health information endanger these efforts by creating a

Purpose of the Administrative Simplification

Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. Final Privacy Rule Preamble.. Purpose of the Administrative Simplification Regulations

This regulation has three major purposes:

Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. Final Privacy Rule Preamble.

[Federal Register: December 28, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 250)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 82461-82510] [DOCID:fr28de00-29] BILLING CODE: 4150-04M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary 45 CFR Parts 160 through 164 Rin: 0991-AB08 Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health

Reasons for Measuring Poverty in the United States in the Context of Public Policy — A Historical Review, 1916-1995. The Early Post-World-War-II Period

In July 1949, the chairman of the Congressional Joint Committee on the Economic Report [JCER — subsequently renamed the Joint Economic Committee] appointed a subcommittee to do a study of low-income families. 16 The appointment of this Subcommittee on Low-Income Families [SLIF] grew out of the post-World-War-II inflationary spiral.

Content by Keyword: Insurance, Health