ACA Marketplace Enrollment is Down in 2026—But All of the Data Isn’t in Yet

Published: Feb 5, 2026

2026 marks the first year since 2020 that enrollees in the Affordable Care Act Marketplaces do not have access to enhanced premium tax credits. The effect of the expiration on how many people will use ACA Marketplace coverage remains unclear.

New data released by CMS on plan selections show that ACA sign-ups for 2026 are down by over 1 million people compared to the same time last year, marking the first year since 2020 that sign-ups appear to have declined. A more detailed Health Insurance Exchanges Open Enrollment Report is expected in March or April that will detail demographics, income, and metal levels for people who select or are automatically renewed into a plan. Plan selection data is unable to fully capture the effects of the enhanced tax credits expiring on the number of people with coverage. As some people end up not making their premium payments, actual enrollment—known as “effectuated” enrollment—will inevitably decline. With the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits, premium payments are estimated to have increased 114%, on average, for subsidized enrollees who stay in the same plan. With such steep increases, it is not yet clear how many people who have selected a plan during Open Enrollment will make a payment. 

This brief explains the limitations of early data in understanding the impact of the expiration of enhanced premiums tax credit on ACA enrollment. It also provides a timeline of when more complete data will become available. The bottom line is that it will be quite a while before we get a complete picture of how much enrollment has dropped following expiration of the enhanced premium tax credits.

What are the limitations of plan selection data?

Plan selection (or “sign-up”) data does not accurately reflect the number of people who ultimately have ACA Marketplace coverage because it does not account for premium payments. In other words, it shows how many people have selected a plan or been automatically renewed into ACA coverage, but it does not show how many people actually gain or maintain coverage.

New enrollees are generally required to submit their first premium payment (“binder” payment) within 30 days of the coverage effective date, thus “effectuating,” or beginning, their coverage. Returning subsidized customers, however, are generally given a 3-month grace period for nonpayment of premiums. This means that these returning consumers would then have until March 31, 2026, to catch up on premium payments before their coverage is retroactively terminated. The impact of enhanced subsidies expiring will therefore not be evident (even to insurers) until all applicable grace periods have been exhausted.

For 2026, nearly 20 million of the plan selections are returning customers. Plan selection data from 2025 shows that more than four in ten people in the ACA Marketplaces were automatically renewed into their coverage that year, meaning they did not actively sign up for their plan. As consumers automatically renewed for 2026 received their first premium bills for January, some may have disenrolled or stopped making a payment. Depending on what action they take and the timing, many people could be counted in preliminary plan selection data (in the “Final Snapshot” just released and the “Open Enrollment Report” in the spring) even though they may not truly have coverage.

When will we know more about ACA enrollment?

Below is a timeline of key ACA Marketplace deadlines and data releases. The data timing listed below is based on recent years’ release dates and there could be different dates in 2026. The section following the timeline explains each of these data sources in detail.

TimingDeadline or Data Release
January 15, 2026End of Open Enrollment in most states
January 28, 2026Final Marketplace Open Enrollment Period Report: National Snapshot (plan selections) in most states; preliminary data are included for states with later open enrollment periods
January 30, 2026Last possible payment due date for January 1 enrollments in new plans
January 31, 2026End of Open Enrollment in all states
March 2, 2026Last possible payment due date for February 1 enrollments
March 31, 2026Payment grace period ends for automatic renewals processed December 15
March/April 2026*CMS Health Insurance Exchange Open Enrollment Report and Public Use Files (plan selections)
April/May 2026Public insurer first quarter earnings reports
May/June 2026Earliest 2027 insurer rate filings to state regulators become public
July 2026*Effectuated Enrollment: Early 2026 Snapshot
January 2027*Biannual National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) Early Release Data
July 2027*Effectuated Enrollment: Full Year 2026—accounts for grace period retroactive terminations
July 2027*Finalized HHS Risk Adjustment Program State-Specific Data; additional rate filings
July 2027*Issuer Level Enrollment Public Use File
2028*Enrollee-Level External Data Gathering Environment (EDGE) data

*Note: Timing is based on recent years and may change for plan year 2026.

Effectuated Enrollment

The effectuation rate is the share of people who have a plan selection during Open Enrollment who effectuate (or start) their coverage. While it is possible that some states or insurers may provide information about effectuation rates earlier, the first national data on ACA enrollments will likely come out in July 2026 with the Effectuated Enrollment Report, if the timing of past years is followed.

As shown in the chart below, the effectuation (or premium payment) rate has been quite high since 2022, meaning the vast majority of consumers who selected a plan ended up with coverage. For that reason, in recent years, plan selections and effectuated enrollment have often been discussed synonymously. However, the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits in 2026 will mark the first time that most ACA Marketplace enrollees experience a significant increase in their premium payments, making past years’ effectuation rates unreliable indicators of this year’s rate.

CMS typically releases an Effectuated Enrollment: Early Snapshot each summer. This data will provide a better picture of the impact of the expiration of enhanced tax credits on enrollment than plan selection data alone.

Based on past years, the Effectuated Enrollment: Early Snapshot report will likely be released in July 2026, and will report February 2026 effectuated enrollment, as measured on March 15, 2026. In other words, the July data release will likely show how many people had effectuated enrollment in February, based on what insurers know about premium payments by mid-March. However, as mentioned above, returning customers have until the end of March to make premium payments under the grace period. So even the data released in July of 2026 may still overstate the number of enrollees.

The effectuated enrollment data released in July of 2026 will likely not count new consumers who missed their binder payment for January or February, nor would it count consumers who were automatically renewed in December but then actively disenrolled in January. However, it wouldstill count people who were automatically renewed for January coverage and did not make a payment during the grace period—even if they eventually had their coverage retroactively terminated as of January 31.

The Effectuated Enrollment: Full Year 2026 data, likely to be released in the summer of 2027, would show the number of effectuated enrollees after all grace periods have elapsed. As a share of plan selections made during Open Enrollment, the chart below shows the final February effectuation rate from the Full Year (green) data has historically been a few percentage points lower than the Early Snapshot (blue).

Fewer Consumers Maintain Coverage than Sign Up during Open Enrollment (Line chart)

Another reason the Effectuated Enrollment: Early Snapshot (expected to be released in July 2026) may not give a complete picture of the effect of expiring enhanced tax credits is that there could still be additional coverage loss later in the year. If an enrollee makes an initial premium payment but then decides their premium is unaffordable and drops their coverage mid-year, they may still be counted in the Effectuated Enrollment: Early Snapshot data even though they will not have coverage after their termination.

CMS may release additional effectuated enrollment counts before the Effectuated Enrollment: Full Year report; since this additional reporting may be after the run-out of grace periods, they would reflect finalized enrollment. In 2025, effectuated enrollment counts for the first five and seven months were released. Additionally, these releases may include information on the contribution of premium tax credits to the gross premium.

While effectuated enrollment data will tell us the number of people who are covered by ACA plans, it will not provide information about who paid their premium. The Open Enrollment Report and concurrent public use files, based on plan selections, will be the earliest source of information about income and other demographics of ACA enrollees. It is likely that the demographics and income distribution of ACA enrollees could shift from between the measurement of plan selections and effectuated enrollment. Additionally, the effectuated enrollment data from the Full Year report does not typically include metal level selection. There could be differences in payment rates for people who stay in their previous plan and face large premium increases and those who switch to lower-cost plans.

Quarterly Earnings Reports: April and May 2026

Prior to the publication of the effectuated enrollment data, some data on enrollment trends may be available from the insurers that enroll large shares of the individual market, during investor earnings calls. Insurers will host their fourth-quarter and year-end 2025 earnings calls in late January or February of 2026: Centene and Oscar will host their Q4 earnings calls on February 6 and February 10, respectively.

Insurers may start releasing membership counts for 2026 during their first-quarter 2026 earnings calls, expected to happen in April or May. Centene has announced their first-quarter earnings call for April 28. Elevance and UnitedHealthcare typically have first-quarter calls in April, while Oscar and Cigna typically report earnings in May. First-quarter calls that include enrollment information may not be fully adjusted for retroactive terminations due to nonpayment grace periods.

Insurer Rate Filings: Summer 2026

Every spring and summer, individual market insurers, including those offering ACA Marketplace plans, publicly file proposed premium rate changes to state regulators. These filings offer insight into what insurers believe is driving health cost growth and changes in enrollment. These rate filings will show insight into what insurers are planning in 2027 and may provide early counts of 2026 enrollment.

National Health Interview Survey Quarterly Releases: Likely January 2027

The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) early release data will provide early indications of changes in the uninsured rate without the enhanced tax credits. From 2021-2024, first-quarter data came out in the summer of the same year, and data for the second quarter of the year came out closer to the end of the year. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has transitioned to biannual releases of data and released data for the first half of 2025 at the end of January 2026. If this release schedule remains consistent, data for the first half of 2026 may become available in early 2027.

Risk Adjustment Data: July 2027

Based on past years, the CMS Risk Adjustment Program State-Specific Data for 2026 is expected to come out in July 2027. The risk adjustment data will provide a state-by-state look at how many billable member months were reported for the ACA-compliant individual market. Because it will include on- and off-Marketplace enrollment, it will capture all people in ACA compliant coverage, even if they chose to purchase it off-exchange.

Issuer Level Enrollment Data: July 2027

The issuer-level enrollment data is split between HealthCare.gov and state-based exchanges. Data for HealthCare.gov states includes more information, including average monthly effectuated enrollment and average months of enrollment for those who have disenrolled. Additionally, issuer-level enrollment across all states will be made available through the Medical Loss Ratio Data and System Resources Public Use File, released late in the following year.

Enrollee-Level External Data Gathering Environment (EDGE): 2028

Enrollment by metal tier can be determined using the Enrollee-Level External Data Gathering Environment (EDGE) dataset, but this is subject to its own limitations: sparse enrollee demographic information, incomplete longitudinal data, and no information on terminated/non-effectuated coverage prevent fine-grained analysis on how the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits affected enrollee decisions. EDGE data for 2026 will likely not be available until 2028.

Community Health Center Patients, Financing, and Services

Published: Feb 4, 2026

Community health centers are a national network of nearly 1,400 safety-net primary care providers that served more than 32 million patients in 2024. They are located in medically underserved urban and rural communities and provide comprehensive primary care services to patients regardless of their ability to pay, providing a range of medical, behavioral, and supportive services. This brief reports on health center patients, services, and financing in 2024 and analyzes changes over time using national data from the Uniform Data System (UDS), to which all health centers are required to report annually, though variation exists across states. An upcoming brief will focus on health center patients, services, and financing specifically among rural health centers.

Editorial Note: This brief was updated on February 11, 2026 to clarify what the data on reported usual source of care for immigrant adults represent.

Introduction

Key Takeaways

Copy link to Key Takeaways
  • Health centers served 32.4 million patients in 2024, an increase of over a million from 31.3 million patients in 2023. Nine in ten health center patients live in low-income households, over six in ten are patients of color, and three in ten live in rural areas.
  • About half of health center patients are covered by Medicaid while 22% have private insurance (including ACA Marketplace coverage) and 18% are uninsured. Despite an increase in the number of privately insured patients, the number of uninsured health center patients increased in 2024, likely due to the unwinding of the Medicaid continuous enrollment provision that led to a decline in the number of Medicaid patients, following several years in which the number of Medicaid patients increased.  
  • Medicaid was the largest revenue source for health centers, accounting for 45% of the $49.8 billion in total health center revenue in 2024. Health center revenue increased in 2024 due to growing patient volume and revenue from payers, but net margins that account for revenue and costs fell from 1.6% in 2023 to -2.1% in 2024.
  • Of the more than 139 million patient visits in 2024, 65% were for medical services, 14% were for mental health and substance use disorder (SUD) services, and 12% were for dental care. The share of health center visits conducted via telehealth remained steady from 2023, with 17.7 million telehealth visits (13%) in 2024.
  • Amid significant federal policy changes and funding uncertainty, health centers face a number of challenges. Changes to Medicaid and the ACA Marketplace included in the 2025 reconciliation law and the expiration of ACA Marketplace enhanced premium tax credits at the end of 2025 are likely to increase the number of uninsured patients and patients who cannot afford out-of-pocket costs, placing new financial burdens on health centers. In addition, increased immigration enforcement in health care settings along with proposed changes to federal immigration policies may sow confusion and fear of using health center services among immigrant patients. At the same time, health centers face ongoing financial uncertainty amid federal funding stand-offs in Congress. The 2026 Consolidated Appropriations Act increases slightly health center funding to $4.6 billion for fiscal year 2026, but only extends funding through December 2026, including for the Community Health Center Fund, which was designed to provide more stable, longer-term funding.

Health Center Patients

Health Center Organizations

Copy link to Health Center Organizations

In 2024, 1,359 health center organizations provided care at over 16,300 service delivery sites (Figure 1). Roughly six in ten health centers served patients in medically underserved urban areas, while four in ten served rural communities. Seven in ten (71%) health centers provided care to 25,000 or fewer patients while 3% of health centers served 100,000 or more patients in 2024. Generally, smaller health centers are located in rural areas or focus services on certain neighborhoods or populations, while larger health centers tend to serve more urban areas and operate multiple clinic locations. In addition to traditional locations, health center sites include those located at schools, homeless shelters, and mobile sites, and some sites may operate seasonally.

The Number of Health Center Organizations by Total Patients Served, 2024 (Donut Chart)

Patient Demographics

Copy link to Patient Demographics

The number of patients served by health centers increased by over a million from 31.3 million in 2023 to 32.4 million in 2024, with increases across all age groups (Figure 2). Health centers served 9.4 million children in 2024, representing 29% of health center patients. Adults ages 18-64 comprised 59% of health center patients while adults ages 65+ made up 12%. The number of children served by health centers dropped during the pandemic and has been slow to rebound. Although still a small share of the total patient population, the number of adult patients ages 65+ served at health centers grew by 38%, or over one million, from 2019-2024, compared to 2% among children and 7% among adults ages 18-64 in the same period.

Health Center Patients by Age Group, 2019-2024 (Stacked column chart)

A majority of health center patients live in low-income households (Figure 3). Reflecting the mission of health centers to serve anyone regardless of ability to pay, nine in ten (90%) patients served at health centers had incomes that were at or below 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL) and two-thirds of patients (67%) had incomes at or below the poverty level in 2024 (the poverty level was $31,200 for a family of four in 2024). The share of low-income patients served at health centers is over three times that of the U.S. population, in which 27% of individuals lived in households earned under 200% FPL in 2024.

Health Center Patients by Income Status, 2024 (Pie Chart)

Most health center patients (64%) are people of color, greater than their share of the total U.S. population in 2024 (Figure 4). Across all health centers, Hispanic patients comprised the largest share of patients at 40%, followed by White patients (36%), Black patients (17%), Asian patients (4%), and all other patients (3%).

Race and Ethnicity of Health Center Patients, 2024 (Stacked column chart)

Special Patient Populations

Copy link to Special Patient Populations

Health centers served millions of patients who were part of special populations with distinct health needs in 2024 (Figure 5). The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), which administers the health center program, provides targeted funding for health centers that serve certain populations identified as underserved by the federal government, including people experiencing homelessness and migratory agricultural workers. In 2024, health centers served 1.5 million patients experiencing homelessness (5% of all patients), 1.2 million patients in school-based health centers (4% of all patients), 1.1 million agricultural workers (3% of all patients), and 400k patients who were veterans (1% of all patients). In addition, health centers are also required to report data on other populations with known challenges accessing primary care. For example, three in ten patients (30% or 9.9 million) were rural residents, which is higher than the 20% of the U.S. population living in rural areas, and nearly three in ten patients (28% or 9 million) are best served in a language other than English.

Health Center Patients by Selected Special Populations, 2024 (Bar Chart)

Health Coverage of Health Center Patients

Overall Health Coverage

Copy link to Overall Health Coverage

Over eight in ten (82%) health center patients had health insurance coverage in 2024 (Figure 6). Nearly half (49%) of health center patients were covered by Medicaid while 22% of patients had private insurance (including ACA Marketplace coverage), 7% were covered by Medicare, and 4% were dual-eligible patients who had both Medicare and Medicaid coverage. Medicare is likely the primary payer for health center services among dual-eligible patients, but Medicaid may cover the costs for dental services and some mental health or substance use disorder services. Nearly one in five (18%) health center patients were uninsured. The share of health center patients who were uninsured varied widely by state, ranging from 9% in several states to as high as 43% in Utah. This variation likely reflects a mix of factors such as the types of health centers in the state, characteristics of the health center patient populations, and state Medicaid expansion status.

Change in Uninsured Patients

Copy link to Change in Uninsured Patients

After several years of decline, the number of health center patients who were uninsured increased in 2024. From 2023 to 2024, the number of uninsured health center patients increased by over 250,000 from 5.6 million to nearly 5.9 million (Figure 6). At the same time, the number of privately insured patients increased by over 11% (716,000) while the number of Medicaid patients dropped by 43,000 or less than 1% from 2023. The drop in Medicaid patients in 2024 after several years of increases is likely attributable to the end of the Medicaid continuous enrollment provision, which temporarily halted Medicaid disenrollments from March 2020 through March 2023. Starting in April 2023, states resumed disenrollments as part of the unwinding of continuous enrollment in Medicaid, and national Medicaid/CHIP enrollment has since declined. Enhanced premium tax credits for Marketplace coverage, adopted in 2021 and extended through December 2025, drove a record increase in Marketplace enrollment that likely led to the increase in health center patients with private insurance.

Health Coverage Among Health Center Patients, 2019-2024 (Stacked column chart)

Medicaid Coverage of Health Center Patients by State

Copy link to Medicaid Coverage of Health Center Patients by State

While Medicaid is an important source of coverage for health center patients, the share of child and adult health center patients covered by Medicaid varied widely by state (Figure 7). Nationwide, about 6.9 million (74%) child health center patients ages 0-17 and 10.3 million (45%) adult health center patients ages 18 and older were covered by Medicaid and CHIP, including dual-eligible health center patients who had both Medicare and Medicaid coverage. The share of child health center patients covered by Medicaid ranged from less than 50% in two states to 80% or more in nine states and DC, while the share of adult health center patients covered by Medicaid was less than 20% in six states and more than half in eight states and DC.

Percent of Child Health Center Patients Covered by Medicaid by State, 2024 (Choropleth map)

Health Center Financing and Costs

Health Center Revenue

Copy link to Health Center Revenue

Despite the expiration of most COVID-19 funding and other supplemental funding provided during the pandemic, health center revenues continued to increase in 2024 due to growing patient volume and revenue from payers. In 2024, total health center revenue was $49.6 billion, an increase of 6% from $46.7 billion in 2023 (Figure 8). Nearly three quarters (73%) of health center revenue came from payments from Medicaid, private insurance, Medicare and self-pay patients, with Medicaid accounting for over 60% of patient care revenue and 45% of total revenue. Federal Section 330 grant funding, which supports health centers’ role as safety net providers, made up 11% and other grants and contracts were 15% of total revenue. COVID-19 funding largely expired after 2023 and accounted for just 1% of total revenue in 2024. From 2019 to 2024, patient care revenue increased as a share of total revenue from 68% to 73%. At the same time, Federal Section 330 grants decreased as a share of total revenue from 16% in 2019 to 11% in 2024.

Health Center Revenue by Payer Source, 2019 - 2024 (Stacked column chart)

Per Patient Revenue

Copy link to Per Patient Revenue

Federal Section 330 funding per uninsured patient is lower than per patient revenue from other payers (Figure 9). Federal section 330 grants support ongoing care to the uninsured, although section 330 grants are not tied directly to the number of uninsured patients health centers serve and may vary widely between health centers. In 2024, federal section 330 funding per uninsured patient ($906) was lower than per patient revenue from Medicare ($1,528), Medicaid ($1,418), and private insurance ($951). Section 330 funding per uninsured patient increased 26% from 2019 to 2023 but dropped 3% from 2023 to 2024 as the number of uninsured patients increased. From 2019 to 2024, growth in Section 330 funding per uninsured patient was lower than the growth in per patient revenue from Medicare (68%), Medicaid (47%), and private insurance (45%) during the same time period.  

Health Center Revenue per Patient by Coverage, 2019-2024 (Line chart)

Health Center Costs

Copy link to Health Center Costs

Rising operating costs outstripped increases in revenues in 2024, causing the national health center net margins to fall to -2.1% (Figure 10). Net margins account for both costs and revenue and are reported as a percentage of revenue. The strong positive net margins from 2020 through 2022 were driven primarily by the increase in COVID-related and other supplemental funding during the pandemic. The negative net margin in 2024 reflects higher costs, which increased 62% from 2019-2024 due to inflation, as well as reduced revenue from the expiration of COVID-19 funding. Net margins will vary by health center depending on factors such as their share of uninsured patients, operating costs, the amount of competitive federal grant funding they are awarded, and other sources of revenue.

Health Center Net Margins, 2019-2024 (Column Chart)

Health Center Services and Workforce

Health Center Visits

Copy link to Health Center Visits

Health centers provided more than 139 million visits in 2024 (Figure 11). Most visits (65%) were for medical services, though health centers also provided a wide range of other clinical and supportive services, including mental health and substance use disorder (SUD) services (14%), dental services (12%), vision services (1%), and other professional services (3%), which include services such as nutrition counseling, physical therapy, and traditional healing. Enabling or supportive services, which are non-clinical services like case management, transportation, and health education that facilitate access to care, represented 5% of all visits. Health centers are required by federal law to provide primary care and supportive services, and they may offer dental, vision, or other services depending on patient need and organizational capacity.

Health Center Visits by Service Type, 2024 (Donut Chart)

Telehealth

Copy link to Telehealth

The share of health center visits conducted via telehealth remained steady from 2023 after several years of decline. In 2024, health centers provided 17.7 million telehealth visits, which represented 13% of all visits (Figure 12). The number of telehealth visits peaked in 2020 at the start of the coronavirus pandemic when 28.5 million visits (25%) were conducted via telehealth but declined from 2021 through 2023 before increasing slightly in 2024. Telehealth represents an important way for patients to access health center services, particularly since some patients face geographic and transportation barriers that can make it more difficult for them to attend in-person visits.

Telehealth and In-Person Visits to Health Centers, 2019-2024 (Stacked column chart)

Health Center Workforce

Copy link to Health Center Workforce

Health centers employed over 313,000 full-time equivalents (FTE) in 2024 (Figure 13). Most (61%) health center staff provide patient care or enabling services, including medical (33%), enabling (10%), dental and vision (7%), mental health and substance use disorder (7%), pharmacy (3%), and other professional services (1%). The remaining 39% of health center staff work in facility and non-clinical support. Health centers are important employers in their communities; however, they consistently report workforce shortages as one of their main challenges. Research indicates those shortages have worsened over time. Ongoing funding challenges and delays may further exacerbate these challenges.

Health Center Workforce by Category, 2024 (Donut Chart)

Impact of Federal Policy Changes

Medicaid and Marketplace Changes in the 2025 Reconciliation Law

Copy link to Medicaid and Marketplace Changes in the 2025 Reconciliation Law

Changes to Medicaid and the ACA Marketplace included in the 2025 reconciliation law are estimated to increase the number of people without health insurance in 2034 by 10 million, which may have an outsized impact on the health center patient population. These coverage losses will be driven primarily by new Medicaid policies like mandatory work requirements for the ACA adult expansion population and the requirement for states to conduct eligibility redeterminations every six months rather than annually, and Marketplace changes, including the elimination of auto renewal and the special enrollment period for people with income less than 150% FPL. These changes are likely to lead to some health center patients losing coverage, even as many health centers provide assistance to patients to help them navigate the new Medicaid and Marketplace rules. Furthermore, changes to Medicaid financing, such as limits on states’ ability to use provider taxes and caps on federal funding for state directed payments to managed care organizations, reduce the federal share of funding, and limit state flexibility in setting provider rates and expanding coverage given ongoing state budget challenges.

Health centers are a primary source of care for immigrant adults, but the 2025 reconciliation law includes eligibility restrictions and make many lawfully present immigrants ineligible for Medicaid and CHIP, ACA Marketplace subsidies, and Medicare. While health centers do not publicly report patient immigration status, data from the 2025 KFF/New York Times Survey of Immigrants show that three in ten (30%) immigrant adults say a health center is their usual source of care, with this share rising to nearly half (45%) of likely undocumented immigrant adults and nearly four in ten (37%) among immigrant adults with limited English proficiency. These data reflect shares of immigrant adults who report they use a health center when they are sick or need health advice but do not reflect use of care over any specified time period and cannot be used to estimate the share of health center patients who are immigrants in a given year. The law limits eligibility for Medicaid and CHIP, subsidized Marketplace coverage, and Medicare, eliminating coverage for many groups of lawfully present immigrants, including refugees, asylees, and people with Temporary Protected Status, among others. Some states have also reduced or eliminated state-funded coverage designed to fill gaps in federally funded coverage for immigrants due to funding challenges, further reducing coverage options for immigrant health center patients. Reliance on health centers may increase among immigrants who become uninsured as their affordable health care provider options become more limited.

The 2025 reconciliation law also stripped federal Medicaid funding for one year to Planned Parenthood clinics, which may increase demand for family planning services at health centers. This follows actions by the Trump Administration and a Supreme Court ruling that restricted funding to some providers of reproductive and sexual health care services. The share of female Medicaid enrollees who received their last contraceptive visit at a health center across the U.S. was 18% in 2023, with wide variation across states. Health centers may face difficulties in ramping up the availability of family planning services to meet the higher demand if other clinics close.

Expiration of the Enhanced Marketplace Tax Credits

Copy link to Expiration of the Enhanced Marketplace Tax Credits

The expiration of ACA Marketplace enhanced premium tax credits at the end of 2025 has increased premium payments for many enrollees and will likely increase the number of uninsured health center patients. Because the enhanced subsidies were allowed to expire at the end of 2025, premium payments for enrollees receiving subsidies increased by 114% on average. While some Marketplace enrollees likely shifted to lower cost plans in response to the reduction in financial assistance, some have been forced to drop coverage. High marketplace enrollment helped keep the uninsured rate low in 2024, but expiration of the enhanced tax credits may reverse recent increases in the number of health center patients with private coverage. Additionally, the shift to lower-cost bronze plans by health center patients could lead to more uncompensated care costs for health centers if patients are unable to afford the higher out-of-pocket costs.

Trump Administration Immigration Policies and Enforcement Actions

Copy link to Trump Administration Immigration Policies and Enforcement Actions

New federal policies could require health centers to verify patient immigration status. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a notice of a policy change to update the definition of “federal public benefits” as outlined in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) to add the Health Center Program, among others, to a list of programs considered “federal public benefits” that are restricted to individuals with a “qualified” immigration status. The policy change bars many lawfully present and undocumented immigrants from accessing care at health centers. However, while the notice limits the health center program to “qualified immigrants,” it does not change the underlying statutory requirements for health centers to serve patients regardless of immigration status, and it remains to be seen how enforcement of the guidance will affect health centers’ ability to provide care. The policy faces legal challenges and in September 2025, a court blocked implementation of the policy as it relates to the Health Center Program in 20 states and DC.

Changes in public benefit policies along with increased federal immigration enforcement actions may have a chilling effect on enrollment in health coverage and access to care among a broad group of immigrant families utilizing health center services, including citizen children in those families. Data from the KFF/New York Times 2025 Survey of Immigrants show that about one in ten immigrant adults say they stopped participating or avoided applying for an assistance program that helps pay for food, housing, or health care because they didn’t want to draw attention to their or a family member’s immigration status. Increased immigration enforcement in health care settings, federal data sharing used for immigration enforcement, proposed changes to federal public charge policy and policies requiring health centers to check immigration status can have negative impacts on the health and well-being of immigrant families due to more limited access to services as well as confusion and fear about using health center services.

Financial Challenges

Copy link to Financial Challenges

Health coverage changes in the 2025 reconciliation law and expiration of the ACA enhanced premium tax credits will likely increase financial pressures for health centers. Research has estimated that health centers could experience over $3 billion in revenue reductions from a drop in the number of patients covered by Medicaid and an increase in the number of uninsured patients resulting from the 2025 reconciliation law’s health provisions. While many provisions in the new law, including some of the largest sources of federal Medicaid savings such as work requirements and financing changes, do not take effect until 2027 or later, other policy changes, such as changes to immigrant eligibility for Medicaid and Marketplace coverage and expiration of ACA enhanced premium tax credits, can impact health center finances earlier. An increase in uncompensated care costs would exacerbate financial challenges at health centers, which experienced negative net margins nationwide in 2024 amid rising operating costs.

Federal funding delays contribute to financial uncertainty for health centers. While Congress previously insulated health centers from funding lapses by authorizing the Community Health Center Fund for five years, the most recent two-year authorization was temporarily extended from September 30, 2025 to January 30, 2026 as part of the continuing resolution that reopened the federal government after a 43-day shutdown. On February 3, 2026, Congress passed the 2026 Consolidated Appropriations Act, which slightly increases health center funding to $4.6 billion for fiscal year 2026, but only extends funding through December 2026. The funding delays create significant challenges for health centers, which rely on federal funding to maintain operations and provide care to uninsured patients. Funding gaps earlier in 2025 caused health center closures, and the funding lapse due to the government shutdown led several states to allocate additional funds for health centers.

FY 2026 National Security, Department of State and Related Programs (NSRP) Global Health Funding in the Consolidated Appropriations Act

Published: Feb 4, 2026

Update: On February 3, 2026, the President signed the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026” which includes funding provided in the FY 2026 National Security, Department of State and Related Programs (NSRP) appropriations bill and accompanying explanatory statement detailed below. This resource was originally published on January 14, 2026.

On January 11, 2026, the Appropriations Committee released the FY 2026 National Security, Department of State and Related Programs (NSRP) (formerly State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs [SFOPs]) appropriations bill and accompanying explanatory statement. The bill and explanatory statement include funding for U.S. global health programs at the State Department. Funding for global health programs at the State Department through the Global Health Programs (GHP) account, which represents the bulk of global health assistance, totals $9.4 billion, which is a decrease of $615 million (-6%) compared to the FY25 level ($10 billion). All program areas either decreased or remained flat as follows:

  • Decreased: Funding for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund), bilateral HIV, tuberculosis (TB), global health security, neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), and vulnerable children declined; while the Global Fund accounted for the largest decrease (-$400 million or -24%), this funding supports the administration’s pledge of $4.6 billion for the eighth replenishment and serves as the first installment of that pledge. In addition, the explanatory statement accompanying the bill states that there are also “sufficient unobligated balances” from prior Acts “to fulfill the United States pledge for the seventh replenishment.”
  • Remained Flat: Funding for malaria, maternal and child health (MCH), nutrition, and family planning and reproductive health (FP/RH) remained flat.

In addition, the bill included provisions that either impact or provide direction on global health funding including:

  • Program Area Amounts: Funding for many of the global health program areas is specified in the explanatory statement (rather than the bill). Unlike prior years, this bill specifically states that funding “shall be made available at not less than the amounts specifically designated in the respective tables included in the explanatory statement” ensuring that the administration is required to provide the amounts for the areas specified. The bill also prohibits the administration from deviating from the global health amounts in the bill and explanatory statement.
  • Funding Availability Timeframe: PEPFAR funding (bilateral HIV and the contribution to the Global Fund) is available for five years. Funding for most other program areas is provided for two years, with the exception of funding for Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), which is provided for one year.
  • Reports/Briefings: The bill requires the administration to provide updates (via reports or briefings) on numerous global health areas including (but not limited to) the PEPFAR Transition Strategy, Market Access Strategy, bilateral health agreements, multilateral health engagement, the development of an Innovation Fund, and the status of available funding (i.e. apportionment, allocations, obligations, and disbursements).
  • Additional Requirements: The bill requires coordination with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on global health activities and establishes the Prevention, Treatment, and Response Initiative, which supports “research, development, and delivery of vaccines and other prevention technologies”.

See the table below for additional detail on global health funding. See other budget summaries (including the summary on FY 2026 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (Labor HHS) global health funding) and the KFF budget tracker for details on historical annual appropriations for global health programs.

KFF Analysis of Global Health Funding in the FY 2026 Conference Appropriations Bill & Explanatory Statement (Table)

FY 2026 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (Labor HHS) Global Health Funding in the Consolidated Appropriations Act

Published: Feb 4, 2026

Update: On February 3, 2026, the President signed the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026” which includes funding provided in the FY 2026 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (Labor HHS) conference bill and accompanying report detailed below. This resource was originally published on January 22, 2026.

The Committee on Appropriations released its FY 2026 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (Labor HHS) conference bill and accompanying report on January 20, 2026.

While most U.S. global health funding is provided to the State Department through a separate appropriations bill (see the KFF budget summary on this funding here), the Labor HHS appropriations bill includes funding for global health programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as well as funding for global health research activities at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Total global health funding at CDC and NIH through the Labor HHS bill is not yet known, as funding for some programs (i.e. global HIV/AIDS and malaria research) at NIH is determined at the agency level rather than specified by Congress in annual appropriations bills. Funding for global health in the Labor HHS bill remained flat compared to the FY 20251 level as follows:

  • CDC: Funding for global health programs at CDC totals $693 million, the same level as the FY 2025 enacted amount.2 Within CDC, funding for each specific global health program area was also maintained at the FY 2025 level.
  • NIH: Funding for global health research activities at the Fogarty International Center (FIC) at NIH totals $95 million, the same level as the FY 2025 enacted amount.

In addition, Section 236 under the Labor HHS section of the bill specifically states that funding “shall be for the budget activities, and in the amounts specified in the table under each such heading in the explanatory statement” instructing the administration to provide the amounts for the areas specified.

See the table below for additional details on global health funding. See other budget summaries and the KFF budget tracker for details on historical annual appropriations for global health programs.

KFF Analysis of Global Health Funding in the FY 2026 Conference Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (Labor HHS) Appropriations Bill (Table)

  1. Funding for FY25 was provided in a full-year Continuing Resolution (CR), which maintained FY24 levels. All FY25 amounts and associated notes are based on those specified in relevant FY24 appropriations bills. ↩︎
  2. The FY26 Request eliminates CDC’s Global Health Center and most of its bilateral programs, except funding for “Global Disease Detection & Emergency Response”, which is transferred to “Crosscutting Activities and Program Support”, and “Parasitic Diseases and Malaria”, which is transferred to “Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases”. ↩︎

How State Policies Shape Access to Abortion Coverage

Editorial note: Updated February 2, 2026 with new updates for Delaware.

State and federal efforts to limit abortion coverage began soon after the 1973 Supreme Court’s Roe v Wade decision. In 1977, the Hyde Amendment banned federal funding for abortion, with exceptions for pregnancies that endanger the life of the woman, or result from rape or incest. Some states use their own funds to cover other medically necessary abortions for their Medicaid enrollees or have been compelled to do so by the courts. The passage of the ACA in 2010 led to renewed legislative efforts to limit abortion coverage, this time in private insurance plans. The ACA maintains the Hyde Amendment’s limits, and permits states to ban abortion coverage from Marketplace plans. Since 2010, many states have enacted private plan restrictions and also banned abortion coverage from Marketplace plans, some of which are more restrictive than the Hyde limitations. A handful of states, however, have enacted laws that require private plans to cover abortion and state funds to cover abortions for Medicaid enrollees.

The interactive map below shows the increase in states with laws restricting abortion coverage for Medicaid and private insurance enrollees in 2010 compared to the present.

State Policies on Abortion Coverage for Medicaid, Private Insurance, and ACA Exchange Plan Enrollees – 2026 (Choropleth map)

On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, eliminating the federal constitutional standard that had protected the right to abortion. States can now set their own policies to ban or protect abortion. As of January 6, 2026, 13 states have banned abortion (Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia). For more details about legal status of abortion in states, please visit our Abortion in the United States Dashboard.

Medicaid Coverage Limitations (30 states & DC) – State limits Medicaid coverage of abortion to the Hyde Amendment restrictions (only allowed in the cases of rape, incest or life endangerment).

Private Insurance Coverage Limitations (10 states) – State has a law that prohibits coverage of abortions from being included in private insurance policies sold in the state (with certain exceptions). Private insurance includes individual, small group, and large group. Some states may allow abortion coverage to be purchased as a rider.

State Marketplace Coverage Limitations (25 states) – State has a law that prohibits plans sold on state Marketplaces from covering abortion (with certain exceptions).

No Coverage Limitations (6 states) – State does not limit coverage of abortion in private insurance or the state Marketplace and the state does not ban the use of state funds (non-federal) to pay for abortion for Medicaid enrollees in circumstances outside of those allowed by the Hyde Amendment.

Requires Abortion Coverage in Private and ACA Marketplace Plans and for Medicaid Enrollees (13 states) – State requires all fully-insured group plans and individual plans to include abortion coverage and state funds to cover abortion for Medicaid enrollees. Ten of these states require no cost-sharing for abortion—Illinois and Minnesota allow cost sharing if there is cost-sharing for similar services in the plan and Delaware prohibits cost-sharing for abortions up to $750.

News Release

Poll: People View Prior Authorization as Greatest Burden in Navigating the Health System

Many Report Impact on their Care, Finances and Well-being

Published: Feb 2, 2026

New KFF polling explores the challenges beyond costs that people with insurance face in navigating the health care system. People cite prior authorization review as their top problem by a wide margin, with a third (32%) saying prior authorization requirements are a “major burden.”

That’s more than say the same about understanding their bill or what they owe (23% say it is a major burden), getting appointments when they need them (20%), or finding providers who accept their insurance (17%).

When asked to choose which of those four factors is “the single biggest burden,” prior authorization before accessing certain tests, treatments, or medication ranks at the top (34%). Among people with a chronic condition that requires ongoing medical treatment (about half of all insured adults), 4 in 10 (39%) say prior authorization is the single biggest burden when it comes to getting care, more than twice the share who say the same about other obstacles.

“The complexity of the health system drives patients crazy, can have real consequences, and disproportionately affects people who are sick,” KFF President and CEO Drew Altman said. “Prior authorization review is the poster child for that complexity.”

Prior authorization ranks as the single biggest burden for people with employer coverage and Medicaid, as well as those who buy their own coverage (largely through the Affordable Care Act’s Marketplaces).

During the prior authorization process, some treatments or medications recommended by a provider may be delayed and, in some instances, an insurance company may end up denying medication or treatment.

About half (47%) of insured adults – and a larger share (57%) of those with chronic conditions – say their access to a certain health care service, treatment, or medication has been denied, delayed, or altered in the past two years by their health insurer.

Among those who report such denials, delays, or alterations, about a third say it had a “major negative impact” on their mental health and emotional well-being (34%) and finances (33%), and a quarter say it had a “major negative impact” on their physical health (26%). This translates to about 1 in 5 of all adults with insurance saying that their mental or physical health, or finances, have been majorly impacted.

Designed and analyzed by public opinion researchers at KFF, this survey was conducted January 13-20, 2026, online and by telephone among a nationally representative sample of 1,426 U.S. adults in English and in Spanish. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points for the full sample. For results based on other subgroups, the margin of sampling error may be higher.

Poll Finding

KFF Health Tracking Poll: Prior Authorizations Rank as Public’s Biggest Burden When Getting Health Care

Published: Feb 2, 2026

Findings

As the latest KFF Health Tracking Poll shows, affordability is the public’s biggest concern, with the cost of health care ranking as their top economic worry. However, KFF polls have demonstrated that beyond costs, insured people report a whole host of issues navigating the health care system. This report looks at which aspects of accessing care and health insurance are the biggest problem for insured adults and finds that prior authorizations – or the process of having to get insurance approval before accessing certain tests, treatments, or medications – are having an outsized impact on insured adults.

One in three insured adults in the U.S. say they find prior authorizations a “major burden” to getting health care. An additional four in ten (37%) say the process is a “minor burden,” bringing the total share of insured adults who find the process burdensome to about seven in ten (69%). This is larger than the share who say other aspects are burdensome such as understanding bills or what is owed (60%), getting needed appointments (60%), or finding providers who accept their insurance (53%).

Stacked bar chart showing how much of a burden insured adults believe certain aspects of getting health care are.

When asked to choose which aspect of getting health care, beyond costs, is the single biggest burden, one in three insured adults (34%) choose prior authorizations, followed by getting needed appointments (19%), understanding their bill (17%), or finding providers who accept their insurance (15%). The choice of prior authorizations as the single biggest burden is even more stark among adults with a chronic condition that requires ongoing medical treatment (about half of all adults). These individuals often require more treatments and medications, resulting in more interactions with health insurance companies and health care providers. Four in ten (39%) insured adults with a chronic condition say prior authorizations are the single biggest burden when it comes to getting health care, at least twice the share who say the same about the other aspects of health care asked about.

Split bar chart showing how much of a burden insured adults and insured adults with a chronic condition believe certain aspects of getting health care are.

Prior authorizations are also identified as the single biggest burden for insured adults across partisans, as well as among individuals across insurance types that typically require prior authorizations such as individuals with Medicaid, people who buy their own health insurance, and people who get health insurance through an employer. Notably, about three in ten (28%) Medicaid enrollees identify finding providers who accept their insurance as the biggest burden, but small shares identify other issues as their biggest burden.1

A table showing the single biggest health care burden named by insured adults, broken out by insurance type and by party identification.

During the prior authorization process, some treatments or medications recommended by a provider may be delayed and, in some instances, an insurance company may end up denying medication or treatment. Overall, about two-thirds of adults say delays and denials of health care services by health insurance companies are a “major problem” with an additional one in four (24%) who say they are a “minor problem.” Just one in ten adults say delays and denials of services by insurance companies are not a problem in our current health care system.  More than six in ten across Medicaid enrollees, self-purchasers, and those with employer coverage say the delays and denials of care by insurance companies are a “major problem.”

A stacked bar chart showing how much of a problem adults view delays and denials of health care services by insurance companies.

About one in three insured adults (33%) say they have had a health insurance company deny coverage for a certain health care service treatment, or medication prescribed by their doctor in the past two years. Three in ten insured adults say that a health insurance company has delayed their ability to get such services, treatments, or medications (29%) or required them to try a lower-cost drug or treatment before covering the one that was originally recommended by their provider (29%). These issues are even more common among insured adults with a chronic condition with about four in ten reporting that an insurance company has required them to try a lower-cost drug or treatment (38%), deny coverage for a certain service or medication (42%), or delayed their ability to get prescribed care (37%). Overall, nearly half (47%) of insured adults say they have had a certain service, treatment, or medication either denied or delayed in the past two years, rising to nearly six in ten (57%) among those with a chronic condition.

Split bar chart showing the share of insured adults and insured adults with a chronic condition who say they've experienced issues with their health insurance company.

Denial and delays by health insurance companies can lead to negative consequences for people’s physical, mental, and financial health. One in three of those who experienced a denial or delay say the actions required by their health insurance company had a “major negative impact” on their mental health and emotional well-being as well as on their finances (about one in six of all insured adults).  One in four (one in eight of all insured adults) say the delays or denials has a “major negative impact” on their physical health.

A stacked bar chart showing how much of an impact issues with prior authorizations have had on insured adults, broken out by those who said they had previous experience with this and among total insured adults.

 


  1. Prior authorization is more common in Medicare Advantage than Traditional Medicare. Because this analysis is unable to break out individuals with traditional Medicare versus Medicare Advantage, we do not include Medicare as a subgroup in our analysis. These individuals are included in both the total group and the group with chronic conditions.  To learn more about prior authorizations for Medicare, more available at https://www.kff.org/medicare/medicare-advantage-insurers-made-nearly-53-million-prior-authorization-determinations-in-2024/. ↩︎

Methodology

This KFF Health Tracking Poll/KFF Tracking Poll on Health Information and Trust was designed and analyzed by public opinion researchers at KFF. The survey was conducted January 13-20, 2026, online and by telephone among a nationally representative sample of 1,426 U.S. adults in English (n=1,355) and in Spanish (n=71). The sample includes 1,028 adults (n=60 in Spanish) reached through the SSRS Opinion Panel either online (n= 1,003) or over the phone (n=25). The SSRS Opinion Panel is a nationally representative probability-based panel where panel members are recruited randomly in one of two ways: (a) Through invitations mailed to respondents randomly sampled from an Address-Based Sample (ABS) provided by Marketing Systems Groups (MSG) through the U.S. Postal Service’s Computerized Delivery Sequence (CDS); (b) from a dual-frame random digit dial (RDD) sample provided by MSG. For the online panel component, invitations were sent to panel members by email followed by up to three reminder emails. 

Another 398 (n=11 in Spanish) adults were reached through random digit dial telephone sample of prepaid cell phone numbers obtained through MSG. Phone numbers used for the prepaid cell phone component were randomly generated from a cell phone sampling frame with disproportionate stratification aimed at reaching Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black respondents. Stratification was based on incidence of the race/ethnicity groups within each frame. Among this prepaid cell phone component, 149 were interviewed by phone and 249 were invited to the web survey via short message service (SMS). 

Respondents in the prepaid cell phone sample who were interviewed by phone received a $15 incentive via a check received by mail or an electronic gift card incentive. Respondents in the prepaid cell phone sample reached via SMS received a $10 electronic gift card incentive. SSRS Opinion Panel respondents received a $5 electronic gift card incentive (some harder-to-reach groups received a $10 electronic gift card). In order to ensure data quality, cases were removed if they failed two or more quality checks: (1) attention check questions in the online version of the questionnaire, (2) had over 30% item non-response, or (3) had a length less than one quarter of the mean length by mode. Based on this criterion, 2 cases was removed. 

The combined cell phone and panel samples were weighted to match the sample’s demographics to the national U.S. adult population using data from the Census Bureau’s 2025 Current Population Survey (CPS), September 2023 Volunteering and Civic Life Supplement data from the CPS, and the 2025 KFF Benchmarking Survey with ABS and prepaid cell phone samples. The demographic variables included in weighting for the general population sample are gender, age, education, race/ethnicity, region, civic engagement, frequency of internet use and political party identification. The weights account for differences in the probability of selection for each sample type (prepaid cell phone and panel). This includes adjustment for the sample design and geographic stratification of the cell phone sample, within household probability of selection, and the design of the panel-recruitment procedure. 

The margin of sampling error including the design effect for the full sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points. Numbers of respondents and margins of sampling error for key subgroups are shown in the table below. For results based on other subgroups, the margin of sampling error may be higher. Sample sizes and margins of sampling error for other subgroups are available on request. Sampling error is only one of many potential sources of error and there may be other unmeasured error in this or any other public opinion poll. KFF public opinion and survey research is a charter member of the Transparency Initiative of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. 

GroupN (unweighted)M.O.S.E.
Total1,426± 3 percentage points
 
Party ID
Democrats473± 6 percentage points
Independents483± 6 percentage points
Republicans367± 6 percentage points
  
MAGA Republicans/Rep leaners352± 6 percentage points
MAHA supporters618± 5 percentage points
Parents or guardians of children under 18 living in their household436± 6 percentage points

Recent Trends in GLP-1 Use and Spending in Medicare

Published: Jan 30, 2026

Ahead of the Trump administration’s planned expansion of Medicare coverage for GLP-1s to treat obesity through temporary models and the availability of Medicare’s negotiated price for certain GLP-1 products beginning in 2027, new data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) shows that use and spending for these drugs under Medicare has grown substantially in recent years, reflecting their demonstrated effectiveness at treating type 2 diabetes and other conditions. Medicare currently covers GLP-1s for type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and sleep apnea, but coverage for weight loss drugs is prohibited by law, even as GLP-1s have proved to be highly effective for this purpose (and even cost-effective, according to a recent analysis).

To address this gap in coverage for GLP-1s to treat obesity, CMS is launching a model called BALANCE (Better Approaches to Lifestyle and Nutrition for Comprehensive hEalth) under which CMS will negotiate pricing and coverage rules for GLP-1s, with the aim of expanding access to these medications and lifestyle interventions to support weight loss. The model, beginning in 2026 for Medicaid and 2027 for Medicare, is voluntary for drug manufacturers, state Medicaid programs, and Medicare Part D plans.

This analysis examines CMS’s Medicare Part D claims data from 2019 to 2024 to document the increase in the number of beneficiaries being treated with GLP-1 drugs and the growth in Medicare spending and claims for GLP-1s. Expansion of coverage under Medicare of GLP-1s to treat obesity under the BALANCE model is likely to increase utilization above current levels, as Medicare begins to meet the demand for obesity drugs among beneficiaries who have been unable to access or afford these medications to date. At the same time, the availability of Medicare’s lower negotiated price for certain GLP-1 products under the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program (semaglutide beginning in 2027 and dulaglutide beginning in 2028) could mitigate the increase in Medicare spending that could come about from ongoing and expanded use of these medications.

Ozempic Was Used by Two Million Medicare Part D Enrollees in 2024, Up from Fewer Than 150,000 in 2019

Semaglutide, the GLP-1 drug branded as Ozempic, Rybelsus, and Wegovy, was the most used GLP-1 in 2024. Two million Part D enrollees took Ozempic, which was approved by the FDA in 2017 to treat type 2 diabetes, up from fewer than 150,000 in 2019 (Figure 1). Nearly 1 million Part D enrollees took Mounjaro, approved in 2022 for type 2 diabetes, up from 54,000 in 2022. This increase reflects a pattern of growing use of newer GLP-1s, such as Ozempic and Mounjaro, while use of older products, such as Byetta (approved in 2005), Victoza (approved in 2010), and Trulicity (approved in 2014), has declined. While most GLP-1 drugs are currently available as injections, the introduction of new oral formulations, which could be easier for patients to take, could result in additional shifts in utilization among GLP-1s.

The Number of Medicare Part D Enrollees Using Ozempic Has Increased Dramatically in Recent Years, Even as Medicare Coverage of GLP-1s for Obesity Remains Prohibited Under Current Law (Line chart)

Medicare Part D Gross Spending on GLP-1s Increased Five-Fold Between 2019 and 2024, But Estimated Rebates of Around 50% Mean That Net Spending is Much Lower

Gross Medicare Part D spending on GLP-1s in 2024 (not accounting for rebates) totaled $27.5 billion, a five-fold increase from 2019, reflecting an expansion in use of GLP-1s with more recent FDA approvals for type 2 diabetes. (FDA approvals of Wegovy for cardiovascular disease and Zepbound for sleep apnea occurred in 2024 and therefore these uses are likely not reflected in Part D data through 2024.) More than half of gross spending in 2024 was on semaglutide products (Ozempic, 47%; Rybelsus, 7%; Wegovy, 1%) and nearly one fourth (23%) was for Mounjaro. Gross spending overstates the true cost of these products to the Medicare program, however. According to estimates from MedPAC, negotiated rebates for diabetic therapy were equal to or greater than 50% in 2023. Assuming rebates of 50% across all GLP-1 products in 2024 would mean net spending of around $14 billion in 2024.

Medicare Part D Gross Spending on GLP-1s Increased Five-Fold Between 2019 and 2024, But Estimated Rebates of ~50% Mean That Net Spending is Much Lower (Stacked column chart)

Claims for GLP-1s Increased Four-Fold Between 2019 and 2024

In accordance with an increase in both the number of Medicare Part D enrollees using GLP-1s and spending on these products, the number of claims for GLP-1s increased four-fold between 2019 and 2024, from 4.8 million to 21.8 million, with claims doubling between 2022 and 2024 alone. More than 10 million claims for Ozempic were submitted in 2024, up from 524,000 in 2019 (an 82% average annual growth rate) and another 5.1 million for Mounjaro, up from 122,000 in 2022 (average annual growth of 549%).

The Number of GLP-1 Claims in Medicare Part D Increased Four-Fold Between 2019 and 2024, With Claims Doubling Between 2022 and 2024 Alone (Stacked column chart)

This work was supported in part by Arnold Ventures. KFF maintains full editorial control over all of its policy analysis, polling, and journalism activities.

A Closer Look at Nebraska, the First State Planning to Implement a Medicaid Work Requirement

Authors: Amaya Diana and Anna Mudumala
Published: Jan 30, 2026

In December, Nebraska was the first state to announce that it would be enforcing Medicaid work requirements early, starting May 1, 2026. The 2025 reconciliation law requires states to condition Medicaid eligibility for adults in the ACA Medicaid expansion group and enrollees in partial expansion waiver programs (Georgia and Wisconsin) on meeting work requirements starting January 1, 2027; however, states have the option to implement requirements sooner through a state plan amendment (as is the case for Nebraska) or through an approved 1115 waiver. Implementing work requirements will require complex changes to eligibility and enrollment systems, as well as enrollee outreach and education, staff training, and coordination with managed care plans, providers, and other stakeholders. Early reports from the state during its recent January Medicaid Advisory Committee (MAC) meeting and data from KFF’s Medicaid work requirements tracker provide initial insight into how Nebraska is preparing to implement Medicaid work requirements. Similar information from MAC meetings in other states and data on the KFF tracker can be helpful to assess how other states may implement new requirements as well. 

Most Medicaid adults in Nebraska under age 65 who will be subject to the new work requirements are working already or attending school. As of March 2025, there were about 72,000 expansion enrollees in Nebraska who could be affected by the new requirements. KFF analysis indicates that roughly 65% of Medicaid adults without dependent children in Nebraska who could be subject to work requirements work 80 or more hours per month or are attending school. In addition, many enrollees who are not working the required hours will likely qualify for exemptions from the new work requirements.

In a recent Medicaid Advisory Committee (MAC) meeting, Nebraska provided a first look into how the state is planning to implement work requirements. All states are required to have a Medicaid Advisory Committee to advise the State Medicaid agency about health and medical care services. These groups include Medicaid enrollees, advocates, and providers. In its January 15, 2026 meeting, Nebraska state officials provided early insight into key decisions related to work requirements and look-back periods, data matching, medically frail exemptions, enrollee verification, short-term hardship exceptions, and outreach (Table 1). State officials also confirmed that the state does not intend to hire or increase staffing levels to facilitate implementation of work requirements or other eligibility changes.

Nebraska Work Requirement Implementation Decisions (Table)

There remain multiple operational and implementation issues the state will need to resolve in the next four months. State officials emphasized that conversations with the federal government are ongoing, and that Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) staff had recently travelled to Nebraska to plan implementation with state officials. As part of the MAC meeting discussion, state officials noted areas where there is ongoing work to identify data sources to verify compliance or exemption status:

  • Volunteer activities. Officials acknowledged they had not yet determined how volunteer activities will be defined or how volunteer activities could be identified through data matching. Current guidance from CMS does not clearly outline what types of volunteer activities count towards compliance with Medicaid work requirements.
  • Education activities. Officials said the state is working on specifics for defining hours of educational activity using course credit hours. The state is also exploring data matching for educational activities, including higher education enrollment data.
  • Work verification. Data matching for work hours was not discussed during the meeting, though officials confirmed that, as required by the reconciliation law, individuals can meet the work requirement if they are working and earn the equivalent of the federal minimum wage multiplied by 80 hours in a qualifying month.
  • Number of enrollees affected. State officials could not yet provide internal estimates of how many enrollees could already be identified as in compliance with the new requirements using currently available data sources, but explained they are currently running models to see who they can identify as being in compliance or exempt from Medicaid work requirements.

KFF is tracking metrics related to Medicaid enrollment, renewal outcomes, and application processing times that can provide insight into a state’s potential readiness to implement data matching and other necessary system changes. As of September 2025, Nebraska was performing in line or better across several renewal metrics compared to the United States national average (Figure 1). Nearly nine in ten applications were processed within 30 days and eight in ten individuals going through a Medicaid eligibility redetermination had their coverage renewed. Of people who retained coverage, 88% were renewed via ex parte processes (meaning the state verifies ongoing eligibility through available data sources before sending a renewal form or requesting documentation from an enrollee), although this percentage in September 2025 was higher than the average of 69% across the prior 6 months. Among those who were disenrolled, 53% were terminated for procedural reasons (meaning an individual was disenrolled because they did not complete the renewal process). While these metrics provide insight into Nebraska’s Medicaid eligibility systems, they are not the only indicators or predictors of successful implementation of work requirements, which will also require enrollee outreach and education, staff training, and coordination with managed care plans, providers, and other stakeholders.

Nebraska Renewal Outcomes and Application Processing Times, September 2025 (Stacked Bars)

As states implement work requirements, ongoing monitoring can help assess how processes are working and identify areas of concern. Central to that oversight is timely data on renewal outcomes, including data on disenrollments related to work requirements. While available data (highlighted above) from CMS can be helpful, these data are not timely enough for real-time monitoring and they do not isolate outcomes for the expansion population. States can fill that gap by reporting more timely data on application and renewal outcomes that include breakouts for individuals subject to work requirements. During the MAC meeting, state officials in Nebraska communicated their intention to be transparent in reporting how many enrollees are disenrolled.

Potential Impact of the Federal Pause on Immigrant Visas From 75 Countries on the U.S. Health Care Workforce

Published: Jan 29, 2026

As part of broader efforts to reduce immigration, the U.S. Department of State (DOS) recently announced that it will pause issuance of all immigrant visas for individuals from 75 countries. This analysis shows that workers from 69 of the 75 countries affected by the pause for which data are available make up nearly one in ten (8%) of the U.S. health care workforce. The pause will likely reduce the supply of workers and particularly health care workers in the U.S., which could exacerbate existing health care worker shortages. Shortages are likely to be compounded by other policies limiting immigration into the U.S. as well as ongoing deportation efforts. Estimates suggest the Trump administration’s policies could reduce legal immigration to the U.S. by 33% to 50% over four years.

On January 14, 2026, the DOS announced that it will pause processing of immigrant visas for individuals from 75 countries who it identified as at, “high risk for use of public benefits” and becoming a public charge. (See Methods for full list of impacted countries). This policy is part of broader efforts to expand public charge policies.The DOS indicates that the pause is being implemented to ensure “immigrants must be financially self-sufficient and not be a financial burden to Americans”. However, the DOS has not provided details about the process used to identify countries subject to the pause. Moreover, few immigrants are eligible for federal benefits due to longstanding restrictions. For example, most lawfully present immigrants have to wait five years after obtaining a “qualified” immigration status to be eligible for federal programs including Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).  

The pause went into effect on January 21, 2026, for nationals from the 75 countries applying for immigrant visas. Immigrant visas allow an individual to live and work in the U.S. on a permanent basis and can provide a pathway to citizenship. Examples of immigrant visas include family-based visas (when a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident (LPR or “green card” holder) sponsors a family member for permanent residency), certain types of employment-based  visas, as well as refugee visas (although entry of refugees to the U.S. has already largely been eliminated through executive action). Individuals applying for non-immigrant visas such as a student visa, tourist visa, or temporary work visa like H-1B are not impacted by the pause. The DOS states that, during this pause, applicants from impacted countries may submit visa applications and attend visa interviews, but that it will not issue any immigrant visas. The pause does not impact immigrants from the 75 countries who are already present in the U.S.

Foreign-born workers from 69 of the 75 countries impacted by the DOS visa pause for which data are available make up nearly one in ten (8%) of health care workers in the U.S. Based on KFF analysis of 2025 Current Population Survey data, there were 7.8 million foreign-born workers (ages 19 to 64) from 69 of the 75 countries impacted by the visa pause as of 2025, including 1.2 million health care workers. A little over half (55%) of health care workers from these countries are employed in health care support occupations such as home health aides and nursing aides, and the remaining 45% are in health care practitioner and technical occupations such as physicians, surgeons, and nurses. These workers include individuals who may have arrived on immigrant or non-immigrant visas since the data do not include information on visa type. Separate data for the remaining six countries affected by the pause (The Gambia, Kosovo, Kyrgyz Republic, Rwanda, South Sudan, and Tunisia) were not available. Among foreign-born workers from the 69 countries, those from Haiti (13%), Jamaica (10%), and Nigeria (9%) made up about one in three (32%), or the highest shares, of health care workers. Workers from 69 of the 75 countries affected by the DOS visa pause accounted for 6% of the total U.S. adult workforce and 8% of health care workers under age 65 (Figure 1). Immigrants from other countries not impacted by the pause accounted for 14% of the U.S. adult workforce and 11% of health care workers, and U.S.-born citizens accounted for the remaining eight in ten workers.

Foreign-Born Workers from 69 of the 75 Countries Impacted by the DOS Visa Pause Make Up Nearly One in Ten U.S Health Care Workers (Stacked Bars)

Methods

Data source: These findings are based on KFF analysis of the 2025 Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS-ASEC). The CPS is a nationally representative U.S. household survey sponsored jointly by the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and is the “primary source of labor force statistics for the population of the United States”.

Identifying foreign-born workers from impacted countries in CPS-ASEC: Foreign-born workers are identified as those between ages 19 and 64 who report their citizenship group as either “foreign born, US cit by naturalization” or “foreign born, not a US citizen”. Those who further indicate their country of birth as being one of the 75 countries impacted by the DOS visa pause (listed below) are included in the sample of foreign-born workers from countries subject to the visa pause. Of note, CPS does not include country of birth data separately for 6 of the 75 countries impacted by the DOS visa pause, namely The Gambia, Kosovo, Kyrgyz Republic (Kyrgyztan), Rwanda, South Sudan, and Tunisia.

List of impacted countries: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, The Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyz Republic, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, and Yemen(Source: DOS).

Identifying health care workers in CPS-ASEC: Health care workers are identified as those whose detailed occupation in CPS-ASEC is reported as either “healthcare practitioner and technical occupations” or “healthcare support occupations”.