Skip to main content

Advanced Search

Advanced Search

Current Filters

Filter your query

Publication Types

Other

to

Blog

/

States Move Forward with Public Option Programs, but Differ in How They Select Insurance Carriers

Denver, Colorado downtown skyline viewed from Red Rocks at dawn.

Sunrise over Denver. The “Colorado Option” launched this winter, requiring insurance carriers in the state to offer gold, silver, and bronze tier public option plans in all counties where they offer individual or small-employer plans.

Sunrise over Denver. The “Colorado Option” launched this winter, requiring insurance carriers in the state to offer gold, silver, and bronze tier public option plans in all counties where they offer individual or small-employer plans.

Authors
  • Christine Monahan
    Christine Monahan

    Assistant Research Professor, Center on Health Insurance Reforms, Health Policy Institute, McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University

  • Madeline OBrien
    Madeline O’Brien

    Research Fellow, Center on Health Insurance Reforms, Georgetown University Health Policy Institute

Authors
  • Christine Monahan
    Christine Monahan

    Assistant Research Professor, Center on Health Insurance Reforms, Health Policy Institute, McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University

  • Madeline OBrien
    Madeline O’Brien

    Research Fellow, Center on Health Insurance Reforms, Georgetown University Health Policy Institute

Toplines
  • Washington State, Colorado, and Nevada have partnered with private health insurance carriers to offer modified “public option” plans, with the goal of creating more affordable, higher-quality options

  • A modified public option involving private insurers allows states to provide residents with more choices while avoiding the administrative responsibility and financial risk of a traditional public option

Three states — Washington, Colorado, and Nevada — have enacted laws creating modified public health insurance options. Rather than establish traditional “public option” plans, administered by the government, the three states are partnering with private carriers to offer plans that meet heightened requirements that advance state goals. This approach allows states to make affordable, high-quality plans available without the administrative responsibility or financial risk of a traditional public option plan.

One key question is how many and which carriers should issue public option plans. Washington is currently pursuing a self-described “selective procurement,” contracting with three of seven bidders to offer public option plans in 2023. Colorado, in contrast, requires all carriers to offer public option plans alongside their traditional plans. Nevada, like Washington, will contract with carriers but still can decide whether to take all comers or be more selective.

Understanding State Public Option–Style Plans

Traditionally, a “public option” has been envisioned as a government insurance plan offered to compete against private health insurance. Under this model, the government administers the plan and bears the risk of any claims.

More recently, the phrase “public option” has been adapted to include proposals like the laws discussed here where a state contracts with or requires private insurers to introduce new plans into the market for which the private insurer bears the financial risk. Like traditional public options, these new plans are intended to compete in the private market and expand consumer choice, with greater public influence over plan premiums, benefits, and networks for the new plan options relative to existing private plans.

For more details, see Christine Monahan, Kevin Lucia, and Justin Giovannelli, “State Public Option–Style Laws: What Policymakers Need to Know,” To the Point (blog), Commonwealth Fund, July 23, 2021.

Washington’s Selective Procurement Approach

When Washington first launched its public option program, the state accepted all five bidders to ensure public option plans were widely available. But participating carriers limited their geographic range to a few counties each and some hospitals refused to join their networks. (Washington caps how much public option plans can pay providers in the aggregate.) This left wide gaps in plan availability and led the state to require hospitals participating in other state programs to contract with at least one public option plan if public option plans were not available statewide by 2022.

For the 2023 plan year, with this new requirement in effect, seven carriers submitted bids to offer public option plans. Most proposed to be in 10 or more counties. Ultimately, Washington contracted with three carriers offering plans in 34 of 39 counties, enabling access to 98 percent of current marketplace customers.

According to Washington Health Benefit Exchange Board meeting materials, Washington’s selective procurement of carriers was motivated by concerns that state residents face “choice overload” and that contracting with all bidders would risk further “crowding” the individual market “without affordability or market competition gains.” Washington chose carriers that offered the best combination of geographic coverage and lower premiums relative to the competition. Looking ahead, Washington plans to continue use selective contracting with carriers to further lower premiums and improve quality.

Colorado’s Mandatory Participation Approach

Colorado launched its “Colorado Option,” this winter. Insurance carriers are required to offer gold, silver, and bronze tier public option plans in all counties where they offer individual or small-employer plans. This requirement helped ensure that public option plans are available in all 64 Colorado counties. In the individual market, six carriers offered 36 public option plans, representing 11 percent of plans in the market overall. In the small-employer market, 11 carriers offered 48 public option plans — about 10 percent of all plans. Despite the influx of public option plans, the total number of plans is down in both markets compared to 2022, after two carriers facing financial struggles exited Colorado as part of wider rollbacks.

Colorado Option plans are required to meet certain premium rate reduction targets and health equity–focused network requirements. While not all plans are on target to meet the premium reductions for 2023, the state estimates that 87 percent of current individual market enrollees will be able to enroll in a plan reaching this target. Beginning in 2024, noncompliant plans will face a public hearing to determine whether one or more health care providers prevented them from complying by refusing to agree to lower reimbursement rates. If the state insurance commissioner finds this to be so, the commissioner can order the providers to join the Colorado Option plan network at state-set reimbursement rates.

Nevada’s Approach Is Still to Be Determined

Nevada is preparing to launch a public option program in 2026. Like Washington, Nevada will contract with private carriers to offer public option plans, but Nevada law also requires carriers bidding to offer Medicaid managed care plans to submit good faith bids to offer public option plans. Private carriers that do not offer Medicaid plans can choose to bid on the public option procurement. To make it easier for public option carriers to build networks, Nevada also will require providers to join a public option network if they participate in Medicaid or other state plans.

The state maintains discretion over how many carriers it will select. Because state law requires the state to maximize alignment between the new public option and Medicaid, and federal law requires state Medicaid managed care programs to offer beneficiaries plan choice, the state likely will contract with at least two carriers.

Nevada plans to solicit stakeholder input on procurement and contracting in the spring of 2023. Its procurement process is expected to begin in late 2024, in conjunction with its next Medicaid managed care procurement.

States Move Forward with Public Option Programs, but Differ in How They Select Insurance Carriers

Looking Forward

Deciding how to involve private carriers in public option plan administration raises many issues that state-based marketplaces have been facing for years, including whether to require carriers to participate and engage in active purchasing or selective contracting. States that partner with private carriers to offer public options are likely to reach different answers based on their market conditions. As more states consider public option legislation, leaders can look to the differing experiences across early adopters to inform their decision-making.

Publication Details

Date

Contact

Christine Monahan, Assistant Research Professor, Center on Health Insurance Reforms, Health Policy Institute, McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University

[email protected]

Citation

Christine Monahan and Madeline O’Brien, “States Move Forward with Public Option Programs, but Differ in How They Select Insurance Carriers,” To the Point (blog), Commonwealth Fund, Jan. 24, 2023. https://doi.org/10.26099/zjec-cj88