Medicaid Coverage of Family Planning Benefits: Findings from a 2021 State Survey

Authors: Usha Ranji, Ivette Gomez, Alina Salganicoff, Carrie Rosenzweig, Rebecca Kellenberg, and Kathy Gifford
Published: Feb 17, 2022

Key Findings

Introduction

Medicaid is the primary funding source for family planning services for low-income people and is jointly financed and administered by the federal and state governments. The federal Medicaid statute establishes minimum federal standards, and for decades, has classified family planning as a mandatory benefit category that all state programs must cover, but does not define exactly what services must be included. For the most part, these services are defined by the states within broad federal guidelines. This report presents findings from a 2021 survey of states on policies related to coverage of family planning services under Medicaid.

The range of family planning services that states make available to their beneficiaries is shaped by many factors, including longstanding federal policies related to coverage of family planning services, federal requirements for coverage of preventive services and prescription drugs, and states’ application of utilization controls such as maintaining preferred drug lists (PDL), requiring the use of generics before brand names, step therapy protocols, and prior authorization. States have considerable discretion regarding Medicaid eligibility criteria, managed care enrollment, and payment structures which also affect beneficiaries’ coverage for and access to family planning care as well as the amount, duration and scope of the services that are covered.

To obtain information about state Medicaid family planning coverage policies for adults, KFF and Health Management Associates (HMA) conducted a survey of state Medicaid agencies regarding coverage of sexual and reproductive health care services. Federal standards for different Medicaid eligibility pathways may vary: traditional Medicaid eligibility, which was in place prior to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the Medicaid expansion pathway in states that have expanded eligibility under the ACA, and limited scope family planning programs for individuals who do not qualify through other pathways. Where relevant, differences in state policies between these pathways are highlighted. This report presents survey findings from the states that responded (41 states and District of Columbia) about coverage policies for fee-for-service Medicaid in place as of July 1, 2021, for the following categories of family planning benefits: prescription contraceptives, over-the-counter methods, STI and HIV services, well woman care, breast and cervical cancer services, and managed care services. Figure 1 summarizes key themes from the survey findings.

Figure 1: Medicaid Coverage of Family Planning Benefits: Key Themes

Key Takeaways

Contraception

While all responding states (41 states and DC) cover prescription contraceptive methods approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), many apply utilization controls such as quantity limits, age restrictions, generic requirements, and Preferred Drug Lists (PDLs). Federal rules require state Medicaid programs to cover all prescription drugs from manufacturers that have entered into a federal rebate agreement. As a result, all state Medicaid programs have open formularies that include coverage for all prescription contraceptives. However, to control costs and promote quality, states may employ utilization controls that can restrict access to specific drugs. Common controls include limiting the medication quantity that can be prescribed at one time, requiring use and trial of generics before a brand name product, implementing a preferred drug list, and requiring prior authorization before a certain product can be reimbursed. Some states, for example, use utilization controls to limit access to newer contraceptive products like the Annovera Ring and Phexxi.

Few states reported imposing utilization controls on coverage of intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants. Most states also reported separate reimbursement for postpartum IUDs and implants rather than inclusion in a global payment for pregnancy-related services. IUDs and implants, the two forms of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs), are among the most effective methods to prevent pregnancy and also the most expensive. In recent years, there have been considerable state and federal efforts to facilitate access to LARCs by improving reimbursement, particularly in the postpartum period, an important time for birth spacing and prevention of unwanted or mistimed pregnancies. Very few states reported imposing limitations on access to these methods, and most of the responding states reported reimbursing postpartum LARCs separately from a maternity global fee to clinicians and hospitals, averting what would otherwise result in a financial disincentive for postpartum LARC placement.

All responding states cover at least one form of emergency contraception (EC) pill under their traditional Medicaid program, but some states impose quantity limits and many require prescriptions for Plan B, even though it is approved for over-the-counter availability for EC pills. Emergency contraceptive pills prevent pregnancy if taken within the first few days after unprotected sex. They are not abortifacients as they cannot disrupt an established pregnancy. All but one state report coverage of prescription emergency contraceptive pills (ella or ulipristal acetate) across eligibility groups, and all but two cover over-the-counter (OTC) Plan B (levonorgestrel) under their traditional Medicaid programs. Far fewer states, however, reported covering Plan B without a prescription (7 states). Providing coverage without a prescription can expedite access, especially for a contraceptive with a short window of effectiveness such as emergency contraceptive pills.

Most states do not have a process for covering over-the-counter (OTC) methods such as condoms or sponges without a prescription. Thirty-eight states reported requiring a prescription from a provider to cover OTC methods, consistent with federal guidance that a prescription is required to obtain federal Medicaid matching funds. Ten states, however, reported covering some or all OTC contraceptives by expanding pharmacists’ scope of practice to prescribe and dispense specific contraceptives, either independently, under the supervision of a licensed provider with prescribing authority through a collaborative practice agreement (CPA), or through protocols such as a statewide “standing order.”

STIs and HIV

Nearly all reporting states cover testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and routine HIV screening under their traditional Medicaid program, and almost all states align non-contraceptive family planning benefits across eligibility pathways within their state. Care for STIs is typically considered part of clinical family planning services. Under Medicaid, however, STI treatment is classified as a “family planning related” service. All responding states reported covering STI testing, treatment, and counseling under their traditional Medicaid program, and almost all align coverage across eligibility groups. Additionally, almost all the responding states also reported covering routine HIV screening in their traditional Medicaid programs.

Few states, however, reported covering Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) which is endorsed by the CDC as an effective method to control the transmission of STIs. Expedited partner therapy (EPT) enables the treatment of the sexual partners of a patient diagnosed with an STI without examination and is recommended by the CDC for treatment of STIs. However, just nine of the responding states reported EPT coverage.

Some states require prior authorization for the provision of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP), a medication taken to prevent HIV acquisition, and some states do not cover it as a benefit under limited scope family planning programs. PrEP medications can prevent individuals from acquiring HIV, and are recommended for individuals at higher risk of HIV infection. Like other pharmaceuticals, Medicaid programs are required to cover PrEP, but 12 of the responding states reported having a prior authorization requirement. Seven states reported that they do not cover PrEP as part of their limited scope family planning programs, where coverage is optional because states can define the family planning and related services that they include for beneficiaries in these programs.

Cervical and Breast Cancers

All the responding states cover services to prevent, detect, and diagnose cervical and breast cancer, but there is variation in the types of services that are included and whether they are covered under limited scope family planning programs. Screening for cervical and breast cancers is considered appropriate for provision during a family planning visit. Every responding state reported coverage in their traditional Medicaid program for HPV vaccines, cervical cancer screenings using cervical cytology and HPV tests, and colposcopy and LEEP or cold knife conization, which are recommended services following an abnormal screening. However, coverage for these services is not universal in limited scope family planning-specific programs.

All of the responding states cover screening mammograms for people eligible through the traditional Medicaid pathway, and most cover genetic screening (BRCA) and counseling as well as medication to prevent or reduce risk of breast cancer for women at higher risk. As with cervical cancer screenings, every participating state covers mammograms under traditional Medicaid, but not all cover them for enrollees in the limited scope family planning programs.

In addition to routine mammography, screening for genetic mutations and preventive medications are recommended for some women at higher risk for breast cancer. While these preventive services are considered optional under traditional Medicaid, 40 states cover genetic screening and counseling for BRCA mutations and 36 cover preventive medication for high-risk women in their traditional Medicaid program.

Broadening Access

While nearly half of responding states cover a one-year supply of contraceptives at a time, few states allow pharmacists to prescribe and be reimbursed for contraceptive services provided to Medicaid beneficiaries. Extended supply and pharmacist prescribing of contraceptives are two avenues for enhancing access to family planning services. A number of states report that they allow Medicaid coverage for a one-year supply of certain hormonal methods, including 18 states that permit a one-year supply of oral contraceptives. However, fewer than a dozen of the responding states reimburse for pharmacist provision of contraceptives.

The availability of contraceptives via online apps is proliferating, but few states provide Medicaid coverage of contraceptives obtained through these platforms. In recent years, a number of companies have been providing mostly hormonal contraceptive methods through online platforms for customers to obtain contraceptives typically prescribed using an asynchronous telehealth protocol. While some of these companies do not accept any third-party payments, eight states reported that Medicaid covers contraceptive purchases secured through these apps. This is an evolving area, but overall Medicaid coverage for these products is limited at this time.

***

Medicaid represents a significant source of coverage of the full range of contraceptive methods and related family planning services for low-income people. In recent years, Medicaid enrollment, particularly of reproductive age adults, has grown as a result of state decisions to expand Medicaid under the ACA and to establish limited scope family planning programs. This survey finds robust coverage of many contraceptive services and supplies, but variation in the application of utilization controls. While there is broad coverage for prescription contraceptives (due to requirements and the drug rebate program) access to newer and OTC methods as well as adoption of policies that have been demonstrated to facilitate access, such as 12-month dispensing or allowing pharmacists to prescribe and be reimbursed, are less common. Furthermore, some states have not adopted protocols that facilitate the prevention of STIs and HIV such as expedited partner therapy or coverage for PrEP without prior authorization, important public health advances that have the potential to improve the sexual health of high-risk populations. In the coming years, particularly if access to abortion services becomes increasingly limited, the choices that states make regarding Medicaid eligibility and coverage for family planning services will make a critical difference in the reproductive health and well-being of millions of people across the nation.

Background

Medicaid, the nation’s health coverage program for low-income people, plays a primary role in financing and providing access to sexual and reproductive health services for millions of low-income individuals. The program covers more than 20 million adults ages 18 to 491  and is the largest source of public funding for family planning services. The program is operated jointly by the federal and state governments, who share responsibility for payment of services, while states set eligibility levels and determine the amount, duration, and scope of covered benefits within broad federal parameters.

Financing and coverage of family planning services is unique within the Medicaid program. Federal Medicaid law classifies family planning services and supplies as a “mandatory” benefit category that states must cover, but it does not formally define the specific services that must be included, giving states discretion as to which services they include in this category. In addition, federal law:

  • Prohibits providers from charging copayments to beneficiaries or any other form of patient cost sharing for family planning services
  • Establishes a 90% federal matching rate (FMAP) for the costs of services categorized as family planning, a higher proportion than for other services. States pay the remaining 10% of costs
  • Entitles beneficiaries to obtain family planning services from any provider that participates in the Medicaid program, called free choice of provider, including for beneficiaries with mandatory enrollment in managed care organizations (MCOs)

Coverage for prescription drugs is another important element in Medicaid coverage of family planning services. All states have chosen to cover prescription drugs, even though it is an optional benefits category under federal law. Furthermore, all state Medicaid programs must maintain an “open formulary,” meaning that Medicaid covers nearly all FDA-approved drugs from manufacturers that agree to provide rebates for a portion of drug payments. States, however, can impose utilization control policies to limit spending and promote quality, which can restrict access to some drugs, including certain contraceptives.

Enrollees who qualify for Medicaid through traditional pathways, those in place prior to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are entitled to coverage for family planning services. Several states have established special limited scope “family planning programs” that extend Medicaid coverage for family planning services only to individuals who are not eligible for traditional Medicaid (usually because their incomes exceed the state income eligibility thresholds or do not otherwise qualify for Medicaid). States can establish family planning-only programs either through federal Section 1115 research and demonstration waivers or State Plan Amendments (SPAs) that must be approved by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the federal agency that oversees the Medicaid program. States can decide which services they cover in these limited scope family planning programs, and pharmacy coverage under limited scope family planning programs is restricted to family planning and related services.

Additionally, states that have opted to expand Medicaid eligibility under the ACA are required to cover “essential health benefits,” including preventive services recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), preventive services for women identified by the federal Health Services and Resources Administration (HRSA) based on the recommendations of the Women’s Preventive Services Initiative (WPSI), and vaccines recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). The slate of preventive services recommended by these committees include several family planning and related services, specifically FDA-approved, authorized and cleared contraceptives with a prescription, screenings for STIs and HIV, screening for cervical and breast cancers, the HPV vaccine, well woman visits, and screening for intimate partner violence. These services must be covered under ACA Medicaid expansion, but that requirement does not apply to traditional Medicaid or limited scope family planning programs, which means that the benefits package could vary within a state for different Medicaid populations (Table 1). However, a 2015 KFF/HMA survey found that most states have aligned coverage of family planning benefits for all pathways, despite the differing requirements. States do vary, however, in the utilization controls that they choose to apply.

Table 1: Minimum Federal Criteria for Medicaid Eligibility and Coverage of Family Planning Services for Different Medicaid Pathway

To understand the scope of coverage for sexual and reproductive health services, the utilization controls that states adopt, variations between and within states, and related state Medicaid policies across the nation, KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation) and Health Management Associates (HMA) conducted a national survey of states about policies in place as of July 1, 2021. States were asked primarily about coverage of services under traditional Medicaid and whether they align coverage policies in limited scope family planning programs and under their Medicaid expansions, where applicable.

The survey was conducted between June 2021 and October 2021. Forty-one states and the District of Columbia responded to the survey (Figure 2). As of July 1, 2021, 31 of these participating states had implemented the ACA Medicaid expansion, and 11 had not implemented the expansion. Since July 1st, one of the 11 non-expansion states (Missouri) has implemented Medicaid expansion. Of the responding states, 24 states also offer limited scope family planning programs financed by Medicaid to individuals who do not qualify through other Medicaid pathways. Two additional states (Iowa and Missouri) operate limited scope family planning programs that are entirely state-funded because they exclude providers that offer both family planning and abortion services, disqualifying those programs from federal Medicaid payments. These state restrictions violate Medicaid’s freedom of choice requirement and Medicaid’s requirement to include all willing providers, which give Medicaid beneficiaries the right to seek services from any qualified provider that participates in a state’s Medicaid program. States that did not respond to the survey are: Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, and South Dakota.

State Implementation of ACA Medicaid Expansion Pathway and Family Planning-Only Programs

Presented below are detailed survey findings from 41 states and DC concerning coverage and utilization limits for reversible contraceptives and permanent contraception, well woman care, STI and HIV services, services for breast and cervical cancers, and requirements for managed care plans regarding coverage of family planning services. A majority of the states responding to the survey contract with managed care organizations (MCOs) under a capitated structure to deliver Medicaid services, including family planning. While the survey’s questions focused on state Medicaid policies and coverage under fee-for-service, these policies form the basis of coverage for MCOs.

Report

Detailed Findings

Prescription Contraception

The survey asked state officials about coverage policies for nearly all contraceptive devices and methods, including prescription and non-prescription methods, as well as reversible methods and permanent procedures for women and men. Reversible methods that are available over the counter (OTC) include condoms, spermicides, sponges, and one form of emergency contraception (i.e., Plan B). Reversible methods requiring a prescription include long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) – intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants; oral contraceptives; injectables, some emergency contraceptives; and various other products (including the contraceptive ring and the patch). States that have implemented the ACA Medicaid expansion must cover at least one product in each of the prescription contraceptive categories for adults in the expansion group, as required by the ACA’s preventive services coverage requirement.

Under federal law, and subject to exceptions for a few drugs or drug classes,2  state Medicaid programs are required to cover all drugs from manufacturers that have entered into a rebate agreement with the Secretary of Health and Human services under the federal Medicaid Drug Rebate program (known as “covered outpatient drugs”). As a result, all covered outpatient drugs are available in all state Medicaid programs under both managed care and FFS arrangements (although pharmacy coverage under limited scope family planning programs is restricted to family planning services and family planning related services3 ). To limit spending and promote quality, states are permitted to implement utilization controls, which vary between states and are often used to restrict access to more costly drugs. These utilization controls include preferred drug lists (PDL), requiring the use of generics before brand name drugs, step therapy protocols, and prior authorization. In the context of family planning, the covered outpatient drug requirements affect coverage of and access to contraceptives, treatments for sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and preventive medications for conditions such as breast cancer and HIV.

All responding states cover most prescription contraceptive methods approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but many apply utilization controls such as quantity limits, age restrictions, generic requirements, and inclusion on a Preferred Drug List (PDL). Most states—with one exception—align their coverage of prescription contraceptives across all of their Medicaid eligibility pathways. Texas does not cover prescription Ella under its family planning waiver.

Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptives (LARCs)

All 41 responding states and DC report covering the insertion and removal of intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants. None of these states reported requiring prior authorization for the devices. LARCs are highly effective at preventing pregnancy for extended periods of time, ranging from three to 10 years depending on the specific type that a woman uses. In the United States, three types of LARCs are available: hormonal IUDs, non-hormonal copper IUDs (also used as an emergency contraceptive), and implants. All states participating in the survey cover all LARC methods through all their Medicaid programs (Table 2).

Table 2: State Coverage of Long Acting Reversible Contraceptives (LARCs)s

States reported few utilization controls for LARC insertion and removal. Delaware manages hormonal IUDs on a PDL, and five states (Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Vermont) impose quantity limits on LARCs based on a specified timeframe that is aligned with FDA guidelines. North Carolina does not cover LARC placement and removal under their family planning pathway outside of certain settings (e.g., office, local health department, Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC), or Rural Health Center (RHC)). Pennsylvania covers one LARC removal every three years. California noted that most LARC devices are limited to clinic dispensing only, although the copper and Kyleena IUDs can be dispensed at a specialty pharmacy.

LARCs Provided Immediately Post-Labor and Delivery

States were asked how they structure reimbursement to clinicians and hospitals for LARCs inserted immediately after labor and delivery. Typically, prenatal care, labor and delivery, and postpartum care are reimbursed through a global maternity care fee, but many providers have reported that the global fee is not sufficient to cover the costs of inserting a LARC right after delivery or at the follow-up postpartum visit. The absence of a separate or increased fee to cover those LARC and insertion costs has been cited as a disincentive for some providers to offer birthing people the option of choosing a postpartum LARC. Recognizing this, CMS informed states in 2016 that they may separate the payment for LARC provision in the postpartum period from the global maternity fee.

Among the 42 states that responded to the survey, 26 reported that they provide separate reimbursement for LARCs placed immediately after labor and delivery from the traditional global maternity fee for both hospitals and clinicians. Thirty-four states provide separate reimbursement to the clinician for the LARC insertion procedure and LARC when placed immediately after labor and delivery while in the hospital or birthing center, while five states include the reimbursement to the clinician within the global fee structure. Thirty states reported providing a separate hospital reimbursement for a LARC device placed immediately after labor and delivery. Compared to the 2015 survey, more states report providing separate reimbursements to clinicians and hospitals for postpartum LARC insertion. DC reported that it does not provide a separate FFS reimbursement for immediate postpartum LARC, but that its managed care plans do, although the reimbursement methodologies vary across the four contracted health plans. Three states, Florida, Idaho and North Dakota, do not have a separate payment for LARC devices or insertions, but rather include reimbursement for both through global fees.

Reimbursement Structure for Postpartum LARC Devices and Insertion

A few states reported other policy or reimbursement barriers to providing immediate postpartum LARC insertion. Nevada reported that hospitals will not allow providers to bring in LARC devices from outside the hospital, despite the state permitting reimbursement for these devices; New York cited the high cost of stocking LARCs as a barrier, and five states noted issues related to hospital claims and payment processes such as global fees or diagnosis-related group (DRG) pricing.

Oregon noted that, in practice, hospitals do not provide LARCs because the state’s claims processing system does not allow payment outside the hospital DRG—a bundled payment that includes the cost of treatments, medications and services a patient receives during the inpatient stay—and because the current DRG payment does not cover the hospital costs for LARCs. The state reported that it is currently considering options that would cover LARC costs for hospitals. North Carolina reported creating a new DRG that includes higher reimbursement for the LARC device and the insertion compared to the delivery-only DRGs.

Oral Contraceptives

States reported supply limits, generic requirements, and inclusion on a Preferred Drug List (PDL) as the most commonly used utilizations controls. Oral contraceptives are the most commonly used form of reversible contraception among women in the United States. There are three formulations – combined, progestin only, and oral extended/continuous use, and many different products within these categories. Fifteen states use a PDL to manage the provision of oral contraceptives and 13 states either require or prefer the generic version of a drug. Eleven states reported that they restrict the quantity of oral contraceptives per prescription to a three-months supply (Table 3).

Five states apply limitations to Progestin Only Drospirenone (Slynd), a new progestin-only “mini-pill” that was first approved by the FDA in May 2019, and currently has no generic equivalent. Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Vermont require prior authorization before covering the drug. Maine and Tennessee require that a patient undergo step therapy, meaning they must first try using different oral contraceptives on their PDL before prescribing Drospirenone. Tennessee also requires step therapy before prescribing extended/continuous use oral contraceptives.

Table 3: State Utilization Policies for Oral Contraceptives

A growing number of states report they allow providers to dispense a 12-month supply of contraceptives. Eighteen of the responding states, compared to 11 states in 2015, indicated that they allow a 12-month supply of oral contraceptives to be dispensed at one time (Figure 4). Having an extended supply has been associated with better access and lower rates of unplanned pregnancy. Washington requires that hormonal contraceptives be dispensed as a one-time 12-month supply unless there is a clinical reason, or the client requests a smaller supply. Oregon reported that they currently allow a 100-day supply and that a system change is in development to allow for a 12-month supply. Three states—California, Missouri, and Washington—also allow coverage of a 12-month supply of the 28-day vaginal ring and the hormonal patch, and Washington covers a 12-month supply of the injectable contraceptive.

State Coverage of 12-Month Supply of Hormonal Contraceptives

Postabortion Contraception

All responding states reported no additional restrictions to contraception provided immediately after an abortion during the same visit, regardless of whether the state covers abortions under Medicaid. The Hyde Amendment blocks states from using federal funds to pay for abortion services under Medicaid and other federal programs unless the pregnancy is a result of rape, incest, or the pregnant person’s life is in danger. However, states must cover family planning services and supplies for pregnant people regardless of whether they are seeking an abortion.

A couple of states noted that they apply the same or similar utilization controls to postabortion contraceptives that they apply to contraceptives obtained in other situations. Pennsylvania and Utah reported that limitations and utilizations controls differ based on the type of contraceptive a person chooses.

Hawaii, one of 16 states that uses state funds to pay for abortion services, reported that contraceptives provided after an abortion must be billed separately from the abortion. In Hawaii, abortion services are carved out and paid through their fee-for-service fiscal intermediary, while contraceptives are billed through the managed care plans.

Injectables, Diaphragm, Patch, Ring, and Phexxi

Almost all the responding states cover the remaining prescription contraceptives included in the survey across all available eligibility pathways. These methods are injectables, the diaphragm, contraceptive patch, vaginal ring (28 day and 1-year), and Phexxi, a vaginal contraceptive gel. All 41 responding states and DC report covering injectables, patches, and rings under traditional Medicaid. All responding states, except North Carolina cover diaphragms. A few states reported covering 12-month supplies of these prescription contraceptives. California, Missouri, and Washington cover a 12-month supply of the 28-day vaginal ring and the hormonal patch, and Washington reported they cover a year supply of the subcutaneous injectable.

The most common type of utilization control noted by states for these contraceptive methods are quantity or dosage limits. States that reported quantity and/or dosage limits for one or more of the methods include: Arkansas, Alabama, California, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia (Table 4). Some states impose age limits or restrict the type of provider that can provide or dispense the contraceptive. Alabama and Delaware require prior authorization for the diaphragm.

Some states use prior authorization or step therapy for coverage of two newer contraceptives, Annovera, a one-year vaginal ring approved by the FDA in 2019, and Phexxi, a non-hormonal vaginal gel approved in 2020. Once a new pharmaceutical has been approved and its manufacturer has entered into a rebate agreement under the federal Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, state Medicaid programs must cover that drug, but may subject it to utilization controls such as prior authorization or step therapy. All states reported covering Annovera, the one-year vaginal ring, and 39 reported covering Phexxi, which the FDA classifies as a spermicide under their traditional Medicaid programs. Three states reported that as of July 2021, they did not cover Phexxi.

Pennsylvania requires prior authorization before covering the one-year Annovera ring and Vermont requires that a patient first try at least three other contraceptives before they will cover it. Seven states—Arizona, Delaware, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Washington—require prior authorization for coverage of Phexxi. Vermont and Tennessee have step therapy requirements before covering Phexxi. Neither Annovera nor Phexxi has generic equivalents.

Table 4: State Coverage of Prescription Contraceptives
Emergency Contraceptive Pills

Emergency contraceptive (EC) pills, sometimes referred to as “the morning-after pill,” is a form of backup birth control that can be taken up to several days after unprotected intercourse or contraceptive failure and still prevent a pregnancy. It is not an abortifacient and cannot disrupt an established pregnancy. The three methods of EC that are available in the U.S. are copper IUDs (discussed earlier in this report), progestin-based pills, and ulipristal acetate. Progestin-based pills, commonly referred to as Plan B or levonorgestrel (generic) are available over-the-counter, without a prescription, while ulipristal acetate (also known as ella) requires a prescription and is effective for a longer period of time following unprotected intercourse than levonorgestrel.

All responding states cover at least one form of emergency contraception pill under their traditional Medicaid program. The survey asked states about their policies for ella (ulipristal acetate) and Plan B products (levonorgestrel). All states but one cover prescription ella under all eligibility pathways. Texas does not cover any form of emergency contraceptive pill under their limited scope family planning program. Mississippi and Rhode Island do not cover Plan B, which is the only form of EC that does not require a prescription, under any eligibility pathway.

Some states impose utilization controls on emergency contraception such as age and quantity limits. Two states, Florida and Oregon, impose a minimum age (12 and 17 respectively) on the provision of emergency contraceptives, even though the FDA does not have an age restriction on these drugs. Seven states have quantity limits, and five states require the use of the generic levonorgestrel. Maine utilizes a step therapy approach, requiring beneficiaries to try the over-the-counter method, Plan B, before using prescription ella. Alabama requires prior authorization for both OTC and prescription emergency contraception. These restrictions can delay receipt of EC, which must be taken within a few days after sex to be effective.

Table 5: Medicaid Coverage of Emergency Contraceptives

(back to top)

Non-Hormonal OTC Products (condoms, sponges, spermicide)

In addition to Plan B emergency contraceptive pills, states were asked about their Medicaid coverage policies for male condoms, spermicide and sponges, which are available over the counter. Federal law does not require states to cover most over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, with the exception of nonprescription prenatal vitamins, fluoride preparations for pregnant people, and certain nonprescription tobacco cessation products. If a state chooses to cover OTC drugs, a prescription is required to access federal Medicaid matching funds (although a state could choose to use state-only funds to cover OTC products without a prescription). The prescription requirement for OTC products can be a barrier because it can take time and additional resources to see a provider and obtain a prescription, but without coverage, these products may be unaffordable for many Medicaid beneficiaries. Many states reported covering OTC contraceptive products, but we found more coverage variability between states and between eligibility groups, compared to prescription methods, and most states reported requiring a prescription.

Over half of responding states (26 states) reported covering condoms, spermicide, and sponges in all eligibility pathways available within the state. Six states do not cover any of these three OTC products in their Medicaid programs: Alabama, Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota, Tennessee and West Virginia. Thirty-two states cover male condoms, 31 cover spermicide, and 28 cover sponges under their traditional Medicaid programs. All three types of contraceptives were covered for ACA Medicaid expansion groups in 20 of the 32 states with that eligibility pathway. Indiana noted that OTC coverage varied in their expansion pathway because coverage policies differed across the managed care entities that provide coverage to that group. Most of the responding states with a family planning waiver or SPA cover male condoms, spermicide and sponges. Washington reported that in addition to covering OTC male condoms, spermicide, and sponges, they also cover natural family planning supplies, such as cycle beads.

With few exceptions, most states align coverage of OTC contraceptives across all available pathways in the state. Two states only cover OTC products through their limited scope family planning program —Mississippi only covers condoms, and Montana covers spermicide. Delaware reported they only cover the three OTC products for their expansion population. States also employ utilization controls to manage the coverage of OTC contraceptives. For example, California and New York both apply quantity limits to male condoms, spermicide, and sponges.

Table 6: State Coverage of OTC methods

Most states require a prescription for Medicaid to cover any of these methods. While condoms, spermicides, sponges, and Plan B EC are non-prescription products, most states require prescriptions for Medicaid to cover them, and a prescription is required to obtain federal Medicaid matching funds. Ten states, however (DC, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Utah, and Washington), reported covering some or all OTC contraceptives without a prescription. Just three of these states, Illinois, Maryland, and Washington, cover all four of these methods without a prescription. Pennsylvania covers male (and female) condoms without a prescription, and Washington reported Medicaid beneficiaries can obtain OTC contraceptives at a pharmacy with a Member ID card or at Health Care Authority (HCA) designated family planning clinic. Illinois Medicaid covers OTC products in limited quantities and in Oregon, pharmacists can prescribe Plan B. DC, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Utah and Washington reported covering OTC emergency contraceptive pills without requiring a prescription, although DC only covers OTC emergency contraception under its traditional Medicaid program and not through its limited scope Medicaid family planning program. Illinois noted that a standing prescription is kept on file and that women can access OTC emergency contraception at the pharmacy counter and have it covered by Medicaid. New York reported that beneficiaries can access Plan B at the pharmacy counter, and the pharmacist can then bill Medicaid in absence of a prescription. Delaware is in the process of implementing coverage of OTC emergency contraception for beneficiaries without a prescription.

Table 7: Medicaid Coverage of Over-the-Counter Contraceptives without a Prescription

(back to top)

Pharmacy Access

Some states allow pharmacists to furnish or dispense some contraceptives without a physician visit. Available now in a minority of states, pharmacy prescribing can provide another avenue of access for people who may not have a relationship with a health care provider, face barriers in getting to a provider visit, or who do not want to visit a provider for a contraceptive that they have been using for a long time. Some states will only reimburse pharmacist-prescribed oral contraceptives, while others also reimburse pharmacist-prescribing for other hormonal methods too, such as the ring and patch. State policies vary on other details, such as the mechanism for this prescribing authority (e.g., collaborative practice agreements or statewide protocols), age requirements, the duration of the supply, training requirements for pharmacists, whether the patient needs a prior prescription from a physician, and coverage under private insurance and Medicaid.

Eleven of the 42 responding states allow pharmacists to prescribe contraceptives for Medicaid beneficiaries. Eleven of the responding states (CA, CO, HI, ID, MD, OR, ND, TN, VT, WA, WV) allow pharmacists to prescribe some contraceptives under Medicaid as of July 1, 2021. Of these states: Colorado allows pharmacy prescribing for OTC products, providing better access to OTC products; Tennessee allows pharmacist prescribing for prescription contraceptives only; and the remaining states cover both pharmacist-prescribed prescription and OTC products. Eight of the states also reimburse pharmacists for a contraceptive visit (CA, CO, ID, MD, OR, TN, WA, WV), while three (HI, ND, VT) do not. Nevada reported that new state legislation had been enacted that would allow Medicaid to implement coverage of pharmacist prescribing in 2022.

Table 8: Medicaid Coverage for Pharmacist Prescribed Contraceptives

(back to top)

Apps and Online Platforms

In recent years, a number of companies have created new products to dispense contraceptives outside of a clinical setting or a brick-and-mortar pharmacy and have applied technology to older contraceptive methods such as using an online app to track fertility using a calendar method. States were asked about their coverage of the natural family planning app, Natural Cycles, and coverage of contraception purchased through online platforms (also known as telecontraception) like Nurx and The Pill Club. Our survey found that few state Medicaid programs reported covering these products as of July 1, 2021.

Natural Cycles

Three states reported covering Natural Cycles, a fertility tracking app that can be used as a contraceptive. The app Natural Cycles received FDA clearance in 2018 to market as the first medical app that could be used as a method of contraception for women 18 and older. It tracks a woman’s menstrual cycle and identifies days on which they should use protection or abstain from sex. Users must take their temperature daily first thing in the morning using a basal thermometer and log it into the app. A similar app, Clue, has also received FDA clearance and will be available in the U.S. in 2022. Only DC, Illinois and Maryland report covering the app across their Medicaid eligibility pathways. However, it is not clear how Medicaid coverage of the app works, whether it is considered an OTC product or if clinicians are writing prescriptions for the app. Recent federal guidance have clarified that most private insurance plans and Medicaid expansion state programs must cover without cost sharing any FDA approved, cleared, or granted contraceptive products that have been determined to be medically appropriate by an individual’s medical provider, whether or not the product is listed in the FDA birth control guide.

Telecontraception

Few states reported covering contraception obtained through telecontraception platforms like Nurx and The Pill Club. In recent years, a growing number of companies have been providing contraception through online platforms for customers to access birth control, usually using an asynchronous telemedicine approach. Clients fill out a health questionnaire that is reviewed by a health professional, who prescribes contraception if the client meets the heath criteria and does not have any contraindications (such as migraines with aura or high blood pressure). Most companies offer a variety of oral contraceptive pills, the patch, the vaginal ring, and some offer emergency contraception. Contraception can either be delivered to a client’s home or be picked up at a local pharmacy.

In this survey, eight states said that they cover these services under traditional Medicaid. However, in separate work, KFF has identified at least 12 state Medicaid programs that cover telecontraception products. These discrepancies could be due in part to different interpretations of the question between states. Most of the states that reported coverage of telecontraception said it would be covered as long clients used a company that was enrolled as a Medicaid provider or pharmacy. Texas reported that as long as both the prescribers and the dispensing pharmacy providers were enrolled with the state Medicaid program, the claims would be covered. California noted while the contraception would be covered, any asynchronous visit initiated directly by the patient would not. Florida and Hawaii reported that while telecontraception apps are not covered through FFS, it is possible that managed care plans cover them. Prior KFF study found that most companies reported encountering barriers trying to work with state Medicaid programs.

(back to top)

Permanent Contraception Procedures

Sterilization procedures, or permanent contraception, are among the most effective methods of contraception. States that cover permanent contraception or sterilization procedures under Medicaid must meet certain conditions to prevent enrollee coercion. Protections against coercion include requiring the individual to be at least 21 years of age, to sign an informed consent form at least 30 days prior to a procedure as well as prohibition of federal matching funds for the sterilization of a mentally incompetent or institutionalized individual. These requirements are intended to protect against coercive practices that had historically forced sterilizations upon marginalized groups, including low-income women, women with disabilities, women of color, and incarcerated women.

All responding states cover sterilization procedures under their traditional Medicaid program and ACA Medicaid expansion pathway, and most align coverage for these services with their limited scope family planning programs. All states report that they cover tubal ligation when the fallopian tube is cauterized or clipped (postpartum and general), bilateral salpingectomy when the fallopian tube is removed, and vasectomy services. California, Texas, and North Carolina do not cover postpartum tubal ligation under their Family Planning SPA or Waiver pathways (likely because the family planning programs do not cover pregnant individuals), though they do cover tubal ligation outside of the postpartum period. Maine does not cover bilateral salpingectomy for their Family Planning SPA beneficiaries. Montana and Texas do not cover vasectomies under the family planning programs. Washington state reports that in addition to individuals 21 and older, the state covers sterilization services for beneficiaries who are 18-20 years old.

(back to top)

Well Woman Care

HRSA has adopted the Women’s Preventive Services Initiative (WPSI) recommendation that women receive at least one preventive visit per year. Well-woman visits provide an opportunity for women to meet with a clinician to discuss and address preventive health topics. Visits can include a broad range of services, such as assessment of physical and psychosocial function, primary and secondary screening tests, risk factor assessments, immunizations, counseling, education, preconception care, and many services necessary for prenatal and interconception care.

Preventive counseling is an important component of well woman care. In particular, the USPSTF and WPSI recommend clinician counseling for women on a number of topics, including contraception, intimate partner violence, STIs, and HIV, and the well-woman visit provides an opportunity to conduct that counseling. Private plans and Medicaid expansion programs must cover well woman visits and recommended preventive counseling without cost sharing. However, states can decide whether to cover and reimburse for well woman visits under traditional Medicaid.

Of the responding states, all but one cover well woman visits in their traditional Medicaid programs. Ten of these states have limits on the number of visits covered in a year: seven (AL, CO, MO, NC, PA, TX, WV) cover one well woman visit per year while Florida covers two office visits per month, and Louisiana covers two visits per year. Mississippi limits traditional Medicaid beneficiaries to 16 physician office visits per year and family planning program beneficiaries to four office visits per year. Alaska is the only state that reported not covering well woman visits. The state covers wellness checks through age 20 only.

All the responding states except DC cover preventive counseling on topics like contraception and intimate partner violence. Three states (Alabama, Mississippi, West Virginia) reported utilization controls that mirror those of their well woman visits. Thirty states reported that they cover preventive counseling as a component of an office visit, and seven states separately reimburse counseling. Arizona and Maine reimburse separately or as part of an office visit depending on how the visit is coded.

(back to top)

Cervical and Breast Cancer Services

The USPSTF recommends services to help prevent both cervical and breast cancers. Like contraception, Medicaid expansion states must cover these services for their expansion populations, but coverage is not required in traditional Medicaid or family planning programs. Most cases of cervical cancer are caused by infection with human papillomavirus (HPV), a common sexually transmitted infection (STI). Pap tests and HPV DNA testing are used to screen for cervical cancer, while colposcopy and LEEP or cold knife conization are follow-up services used after an abnormal screening result. The preventive services that USPSTF recommends for breast cancer include routine mammography, genetic screening for individuals with family history and certain risk factors, and preventive medications for some women at higher-risk for developing breast cancer.

Cervical Cancer

All the responding states cover a variety of cervical cancer screenings and tests, including cervical cytology also known as the Pap test, high-risk Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone as well as co-testing for cervical cytology and high-risk HPV. All states cover these screenings under traditional Medicaid and align coverage across other eligibility pathways, except Wyoming and California. California has more restrictive coverage criteria for its family planning program, FamilyPACT. Under this program, the state covers screening services if they are provided along with a contraceptive visit. Some states reported covering cytology for individuals over 21 years old, in accordance with clinical recommendations. Colorado and North Carolina limit screening to one test per year. While the survey asked states only about fee-for-service policies, Tennessee, which only has managed care, noted that utilization management criteria vary between MCOs.4 

All states cover the follow-up cervical screening services, colposcopy and LEEP or cold knife conization under traditional Medicaid, but some do not cover these services under their limited scope family planning programs. North Carolina, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming do not cover these follow up cervical cancer services under their family planning waivers. California’s family planning program follows the 2019 ASCCP5  Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines for Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors for colposcopies and does not cover cold knife conization.

All, but one, of the responding states cover the HPV vaccine for adults in their traditional Medicaid program. Virginia reported that coverage for the HPV vaccine is limited to enrollees up to the age of 18 under traditional Medicaid. Four states (Alabama, California, North Carolina, and Washington) do not cover the HPV vaccine as a benefit in their family planning programs.

Table 9: Medicaid Coverage of Cervical Cancer Services

Breast Cancer

All the responding states cover screening mammograms in their traditional Medicaid programs. Of those, three states have age limits and other medical necessity criteria that must be met (CA, NC, WA).4 Six states do not cover mammograms in their family planning programs (CA, LA, MT, NC, WA, WY).

Nearly all (40 of 41) of the responding states cover genetic (BRCA) screening and counseling for high-risk women in their Traditional Medicaid program. The USPSTF recommends that women with a personal or family history of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer receive counseling and screening for BRCA gene mutations. Fourteen states (AK, CO, CT, IA, MI, MT, NC, OK, SC, TX, UT, VA, WA, WY) require prior authorization for coverage. Nine states do not cover BRCA screening and counseling in their family planning waiver or SPA programs (CA, LA, ME, MT, NC, TX, VA, WA, WY). Alabama does not cover BRCA screening and counseling for any beneficiaries. One state (HI) did not answer this question.

Thirty-six states cover breast cancer preventive medication for high-risk women in their traditional Medicaid program, and five states do not (IA, IN, ME, VA, WY). The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer risk-reducing medications to some women at higher risk for breast cancer. Of the states that do offer coverage, six limit the type of medication through their PDL, generic requirements, or prior authorization (CA, CT, MI, MT, OK, WA).

All the responding states reported participating in the Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment Program (BCCTP). The BCCTP is an optional program for states to extend Medicaid coverage to uninsured persons who are diagnosed with breast or cervical cancer. While this program is a state option, all participate. Colorado, Florida, Kansas and Maryland administer the program through other state agencies. States can choose to extend Medicaid eligibility to persons screened or diagnosed with funding from the CDC’s National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) or, more broadly, persons screened under the NBCCEDP program, regardless of the funding source or diagnosis site. Of the states that responded to this question, 15 extend BCCTP eligibility only to persons screened or diagnosed through the CDC’s NBCCEDP, and 26 states extend Medicaid coverage under BCCTP eligibility to anyone screened and diagnosed through NBCCEDP regardless of the original funding source or diagnosis site.

Table 10: Medicaid Coverage of Breast Cancer Services

(back to top)

Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs)

Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are very common and encompass many different types of viral and bacterial infections. Rates of some STIs, including chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis have been on the rise in the United States. While STIs are often asymptomatic, they can have negative long-term health effects, such as pain, infertility, and miscarriage. Early treatment is important for curbing more serious illness as well as spread of infections to partners.

In the states that have implemented the ACA Medicaid expansion, STI counseling and screenings must be covered at no cost for beneficiaries enrolled in the expansion pathway. However, this requirement does not apply to those covered under traditional Medicaid or those enrolled in limited scope family planning programs where states have the option whether to cover specific STI screenings and treatments. Also, because CMS has classified STI treatment as a "family planning related service," federal funding for STI care is available at a state’s regular FMAP rates and not the enhanced 90% FMAP provided for family planning services. States may also impose nominal out-of-pocket charges for STI care under traditional Medicaid or in limited scope family planning programs.

Table 11: Coverage of STI Services Under Medicaid

All reporting states cover STI testing, treatment, and counseling under their traditional Medicaid program, and while most states align coverage across all eligibility pathways, there are some notable exceptions. Virginia and Wyoming reported that they do not cover STI treatment under their family planning waivers. North Carolina reported that beneficiaries are limited to one annual exam, six visits between exams, and a total of six courses of antibiotics annually. Oklahoma covers STI services, but generic medications are required, and services are subject to a possible copayment of $4.00. Texas commented that coverage for STI services is “subject to retrospective review of medical record and recoupment of payment if documentation does not support the service billed.”

Six states separately reimburse for STI counseling, and the remaining states reimburse it as a component of an office visit. Maine reported that physicians could be separately reimbursed for STI counseling, but other provider types such as FQHCs, RHCs, and family planning agencies are reimbursed as a component of the office/clinic visit. Separate reimbursement helps to compensate clinicians for the time they spend on counseling and may serve as an incentive to provide counseling to patients.

Only nine of the responding states reported coverage of expedited partner therapy (EPT) under any eligibility pathway. Expedited partner therapy (EPT) permits the treatment of partners of patients diagnosed with an STI without examination by providing the patient directly with extra doses for each eligible partner or by writing a prescription for the partner as well. The CDC has recommended this practice since 2006 in certain circumstances due to its success in reducing gonorrhea reinfection rates. Most states allow the practice, but many do not allow the patient’s insurance coverage to be billed for the partner’s treatment, which can create a financial barrier to care for the partner.

Of the nine states reporting EPT coverage, some limit coverage to certain diagnoses. For example, Indiana and Vermont limit EPT to gonorrhea or chlamydia diagnoses, and Tennessee covers EPT only for chlamydia. Massachusetts and Indiana will only cover treatment for the partner if they are also a Medicaid beneficiary. California will reimburse for the treatment of the Medicaid beneficiary and up to five partners. Michigan provides EPT outside of the Medicaid program through their Department of Health and Human Services HIV/STI program to all regardless of insurance status.

(back to top)

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)

The Medicaid program plays a major role in care of individuals living with HIV and is the largest source of insurance coverage for people with HIV. The number of Medicaid beneficiaries with HIV has grown over time as the program has expanded, people with HIV are living longer, and new infections continue to occur. The program covers a wide range of benefits, including screening, prevention, prescription drugs, and treatment services. The survey asked about state coverage of HIV screening and preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), which are medications that can prevent infection. The USPSTF recommends routine screening for adults and adolescents ages 15 to 65 as well as PrEP medications for individuals at higher risk for HIV, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends routine HIV screening in health-care settings for all adults, aged 13-64, and repeat screening for those at higher risk.

Nearly all reporting states cover routine HIV screening in their traditional Medicaid programs. All but one of state surveyed cover HIV screening for all individuals under traditional Medicaid. The exception, Florida, covers HIV screening only for at-risk individuals in their traditional Medicaid program. States are required, at minimum, to cover “medically necessary” testing under their traditional eligibility pathway.

A dozen states report prior authorization requirements for PrEP medications. PrEP medications, which were first approved by the FDA in 2014, prevent individuals from acquiring HIV. There are two medications that have been approved for PrEP, under the brand names Truvada and Descovy. Truvada is approved for use as PrEP in males and females. Descovy is not approved for use as PrEP in females who are at risk for HIV through vaginal sex. Generics are available for Truvada but not for Descovy. While Medicaid programs are required to cover PrEP under the traditional eligibility pathway, they may apply utilization controls. Twelve of the responding states said they require prior authorization for PrEP and Washington requires prior authorization for brand name HIV PrEP medications only. Missouri reported that it requires prior authorization for PrEP in its traditional Medicaid program but not in its state-funded family planning program.

Although most states align their HIV testing and PrEP coverage policies, several states do not provide coverage for these services under their family planning waivers or SPAs. Washington does not cover HIV testing for beneficiaries in their family planning waiver. Washington, Virginia, Texas, New York, North Carolina, California, and Montana do not cover HIV PrEP under their family planning program, though North Carolina does refer members to participating drug stores and clinics. New York reports they are actively working to include coverage for PrEP for family planning SPA beneficiaries, and Texas requires providers to refer family planning waiver beneficiaries for treatment as necessary.

Table 12: Medicaid Coverage of HIV Services

(back to top)

Managed Care

This survey asked states about fee-for-service coverage policies, but most of the survey states enroll the majority of adult beneficiaries in capitated managed care organizations (MCOs). While state Medicaid programs make determinations about the services that they will cover, for beneficiaries enrolled in managed care, coverage policies are established through the contracts that states sign with MCOs, which may vary between plans. Nine of the responding states (AL, AK, CT, ID, ME, MT, OK, VT, WY) do not have Medicaid MCO enrollment.

When a state chooses to cover family planning services under a capitated MCO, the state must implement policies, procedures, and contractual requirements that will allow the state to claim the enhanced 90% FMAP allowed for family planning services delivered under that capitated arrangement. The state must also ensure that the full costs of family planning services are covered and that MCO-enrolled beneficiaries are able to see any Medicaid provider of their choice, even if the provider is not in the MCO’s network. State policies regarding benefits and payment rates under fee-for-service may set minimum standards for MCOs, but MCOs may elect to cover benefits beyond what is required in their contract and may pay providers more than the minimum fee-for-service rate. We asked states if they include family planning services within MCO capitation rates and whether they claim the enhanced 90% FMAP for family planning services purchased by MCOs. We also asked if their MCO contracts explicitly address utilization controls for family planning services.

Most of the responding states have capitated MCO contracts that include family planning services in the capitation rate. Most, but not all responding states with MCOs (26 of 31) reported that they claimed the enhanced 90 percent federal matching rate for family planning services provided through MCO. Four states (LA, MT, ND, WV) reported that they do not claim the enhanced 90% FMAP, and one state (Kansas) did not answer this question. Thirteen states reported that they explicitly address potential utilization controls on family planning services in the MCO contracts. Five states prohibit the use of prior authorization for family planning services and supplies in their MCO contracts. One state, Washington, stated that they are explicit in MCO contracts that plans must cover a one-year supply of contraceptives and all OTC methods without a prescription, as required by laws in that state.

Three states (OR, IL, TX) report that they contract with MCOs that have a “conscience” or religious exemption from the requirement to provide family planning services. Insurance plans that are “faith-based” may not cover the full range of family planning services over objections allegedly based on religion, limiting access for beneficiaries particularly if the plan has a narrow provider network. All three of these states indicated that beneficiaries can receive coverage for family planning services outside of the plan network if their plan has any religious objections. Illinois reported that plans must have contracted facilities nearby that can provide family planning services.

Conclusion

Family planning services have been part of the Medicaid program for decades. Over time, the field has evolved, with changes in clinical practices and an expansion in the realm of services that address sexual health beyond pregnancy prevention. On the whole, this survey finds that while all states cover a broad range of contraceptive methods, some impose limitations like prior authorization or quantity limits that are sometimes used to help states control spending but can affect beneficiaries’ ability to obtain their preferred contraceptives in a timely manner. Access to newer products, over-the-counter methods, and online services are often less available to those enrolled in Medicaid. We also found less uniformity in coverage policies for recommended non-contraceptive services like expedited partner therapy, to curb the spread of STIs, and PrEP, to prevent HIV infection in higher risk populations.

The survey also illustrates the regulatory complexities that impact coverage for specific services within a state. One of the features of the Medicaid program is flexibility for states to establish coverage policies on their own, within broad federal guidelines. The sheer breadth of family planning products, the different eligibility pathways, the range of utilization controls, varying levels of reimbursement between family planning and related products, and intersection with other public health programs in a state mean that it can be very difficult to ascertain coverage for the range of benefits for the different eligibility pathways available under Medicaid. This survey asked about state policies under fee-for-service, which also form the basis for coverage policies in managed care organizations. For beneficiaries trying to understand and use their Medicaid coverage for important preventive services, particularly if they rely on specific products, it can be formidable to navigate and assess exactly what is and is not covered.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the numerous staff members in state Medicaid agencies who participated in the survey. The authors also thank the following individuals, who provided input in the survey questionnaire, data management, and analysis: Jim McEvoy and Kraig Gazley of Health Management Associates; Michael Policar of UCSF; Cathy Peters of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.

Endnotes

  1. KFF estimates based on the Census Bureau’s March Current Population Survey (CPS: Annual Social and Economic Supplements), 2021. ↩︎
  2. Section 1927(d)(2) provides that the following drugs or classes of drugs, or their medical uses, may be excluded from coverage or otherwise restricted: (A) Agents when used for anorexia, weight loss, or weight gain. (B) Agents when used to promote fertility. (C) Agents when used for cosmetic purposes or hair growth. (D) Agents when used for the symptomatic relief of cough and colds. (E) Agents when used to promote smoking cessation. (F) Prescription vitamins and mineral products, except prenatal vitamins and fluoride preparations. (G) Nonprescription drugs, except, in the case of pregnant women when recommended in accordance with the Guideline referred to in section 1905(bb)(2)(A), agents approved by the Food and Drug Administration under the over-the-counter monograph process for purposes of promoting, and when used to promote, tobacco cessation. (H) Covered outpatient drugs which the manufacturer seeks to require as a condition of sale that associated tests or monitoring services be purchased exclusively from the manufacturer or its designee. (I) Barbiturates. (J) Benzodiazepines. (K) Agents when used for the treatment of sexual or erectile dysfunction, unless such agents are used to treat a condition, other than sexual or erectile dysfunction, for which the agents have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. ↩︎
  3. “Family planning related services are medical, diagnostic, and treatment services provided pursuant to a family planning visit that address an individual’s medical condition and may be provided for a variety of reasons including, but not limited to: treatment of medical conditions routinely diagnosed during a family planning visit, such as treatment for urinary tract infections or sexually transmitted infection; preventive services routinely provided during a family planning visit, such as the HPV vaccine; or treatment of a major medical complication resulting from a family planning visit.” CMS, SHO# 16-008, Medicaid Family Planning Services and Supplies, June 14, 2016; accessed at https://www.medicaid.gov/sites/default/files/federal-policy-guidance/downloads/sho16008.pdf. ↩︎
  4. [1] “Family planning related services are medical, diagnostic, and treatment services provided pursuant to a family planning visit that address an individual’s medical condition and may be provided for a variety of reasons including, but not limited to: treatment of medical conditions routinely diagnosed during a family planning visit, such as treatment for urinary tract infections or sexually transmitted infection; preventive services routinely provided during a family planning visit, such as the HPV vaccine; or treatment of a major medical complication resulting from a family planning visit.” CMS, SHO# 16-008, Medicaid Family Planning Services and Supplies, June 14, 2016; accessed at https://www.medicaid.gov/sites/default/files/federal-policy-guidance/downloads/sho16008.pdf. ↩︎
  5. American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. ↩︎
News Release

New KFF Analyses on Women and Medicaid: State Family Planning Benefits and Contraceptive Provision

Published: Feb 17, 2022

Medicaid, the state and federal health coverage program for low-income people, finances family planning services for millions of women across the nation. National statistics, however, can mask important state-level Medicaid policy and utilization differences. Two new KFF state-level analyses have just been posted that provide up-to-date coverage policies and practices as well as new data on contraceptive provision under Medicaid.

Medicaid Coverage of Family Planning Benefits: Findings from a 2021 State Survey

Based on findings from a national survey of states on Medicaid family planning coverage policies for adults, this new report finds that while all states cover a broad range of contraceptive methods, many impose limitations like prior authorization or quantity limits. These are used to help states control spending but can affect beneficiaries’ ability to obtain their preferred method in a timely manner. In terms of other family planning services, while most states reported covering sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing and treatment, some require prior authorization for Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV acquisition. Despite the growth in STI rates in many states, few reported covering Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) which is endorsed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as an effective method to control the transmission of STIs.

Family Planning and Contraceptive Provision Among Females Enrolled in MedicaidAccording to a new analysis using national Medicaid claims data, one in four female Medicaid enrollees of reproductive age was provided at least one contraceptive service in 2018. This range, however, varied considerably by state, from a low of 18% in Arkansas and Arizona to a high of 34% in Wisconsin. The most common method provided to enrollees was oral contraception, followed by injectable contraception (DMPA), then IUDs. The new analysis also highlights notable regional and age differences by type of method. Women in the South had the lowest provision of oral contraceptives and the highest annual sterilization rates. Not surprisingly, a higher share of women ages 30-49 relied on sterilization and IUDs compared to younger women ages 15-29 who tended to rely on other hormonal methods.

For additional information and data on Medicaid coverage for women, see our new data note featuring new analysis and data on Medicaid across the lifespan.

 

Medicaid Coverage for Women

Published: Feb 17, 2022

Medicaid, the nation’s health coverage program for poor and low-income people, provides millions of low-income women across the nation with health and long-term care coverage. Women comprise the majority of the adult Medicaid population and the program offers coverage of a wide range of primary, preventive, specialty, and long-term care services that are important to women across their lifespans. Given the importance of the program for low-income women and their families, changes to the program, such as Medicaid expansion and the new state option to extend postpartum coverage beyond 60 days, have significant implications for low-income women’s access to coverage and care. Proposed congressional legislation would have further implications for Medicaid and women from postpartum coverage to maternal health, as well the Medicaid coverage gap and would include investments in health and community-based services. This data note presents key data points describing the current state of the Medicaid program as it affects women.

Who is Eligible for Coverage?

In 2019 adult women comprised 36% of the overall Medicaid population and the majority of adults on the program (Figure 1). Prior to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), women were more likely to qualify for Medicaid than men because of their lower incomes and because they were more likely to belong to one of Medicaid’s categories of eligibility for adults: pregnant, parent of a dependent child, senior, or person with a disability. The 2010 ACA added a new Medicaid eligibility category by extending Medicaid eligibility to nearly all non-elderly individuals with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL).1 

Figure 1: 31 Million Adult Women Were Enrolled in Medicaid in 2019
  • As of December 2021, 38 states and DC have opted to expand eligibility for Medicaid under the ACA, which allows nonelderly low-income women with incomes below 138% FPL to qualify regardless of their pregnancy, parenting or disability status.
  • In the 12 states that have not expanded Medicaid under the ACA as of January 2022, adults only qualify if they meet income criteria AND belong to one of the previously mentioned eligibility categorical groups. While there are federal eligibility minimums, states have the option to expand eligibility levels for each group up to certain limits. As a result, income eligibility criteria vary for different groups of beneficiaries within as well as between states. Eligibility levels are much lower for parents in the states that have not expanded Medicaid compared to those that have, ranging from 17% FPL in Texas, to 100% FPL in Wisconsin (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Medicaid Income Eligibility Limits for Parents are Lower in States that Have Not Implemented the Medicaid ACA Expansion
  • Many women who are uninsured are potentially eligible for coverage but are not enrolled. In 2020, one in five (2.1 million) uninsured women were eligible for Medicaid but were not enrolled, and one million women were in the “Medicaid coverage gap.” They live in a state that has not expanded its Medicaid program and do not qualify for Medicaid but have incomes below the lower level (100% FPL) for Marketplace subsidies.

Profile of Nonelderly Women Covered by Medicaid

The diverse population of women covered by Medicaid face many social, economic, and health challenges that affect their ability to receive timely and high-quality health care.

  • In 2020, Medicaid covered 16% of nonelderly adult women in the United States, but coverage rates were higher among certain groups, such as those in fair or poor health, women of color, single mothers, low-income women, and women who have not completed a high school education (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Medicaid Covers a Disproportionate Share of Women in Underserved Populations
  • Over half of nonelderly women on Medicaid who do not receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and who are not dually eligible for Medicare work outside the home (59%). Many others are not employed for pay but are caring for family members (19%), are not working due to illness or disability (9%) or attend school (6%). Approximately six in ten mothers on Medicaid (62%) are working and another quarter are caring for family members. Among women without children, half (56%) are working and another 14% are not working due to illness or disability (Figure 4).
Most Women Covered by Medicaid Work Outside the Home
  • Differences in Medicaid eligibility levels and poverty rates across the states translate into vastly different Medicaid coverage rates for women across states, from a low of 7% in South Dakota to 29% in New Mexico (Figure 5).
Medicaid Coverage Varies Considerably by State

Reproductive Health

Roughly two-thirds (64%) of adult women with Medicaid coverage are in their reproductive years (19 to 49).2  Medicaid covers a wide range of reproductive health care services, including family planning, and pregnancy-related care including prenatal services, childbirth, and postpartum care—all without cost-sharing. Medicaid coverage of abortion services, however, is very limited under federal law and in most states.

Family planning

Federal law requires state Medicaid programs to offer family planning benefits, but states determine the specific services and supplies for those who qualify through pre-ACA pathways. For the ACA expansion populations, the ACA requires states to cover all FDA approved, granted, and cleared contraceptive methods, counseling on STIs and HIV, and screening for breast and cervical cancers. Research has found that most states have aligned their benefits and cover these services across all eligibility groups.

  • The federal government pays 90% of costs for family planning services, a higher federal matching rate than for other services (typically between 50% and 78%)3 . Women covered by Medicaid cannot be charged any out-of-pocket costs for family planning services.
  • The federal government also guarantees Medicaid beneficiaries “free choice of provider,” which allows them to seek care from any qualified participating provider that offers the services. While free choice of provider is not specific to family planning, it means that states cannot bar providers from the Medicaid program simply because they provide abortion services. However, judicial rulings have allowed some states to exclude Planned Parenthood from their Medicaid programs. These cases are ongoing. For beneficiaries enrolled in managed care arrangements, there is a protection that specifically allows them to seek family planning services from the provider of their choice even if the provider is outside of the plan’s network.
  • Twenty-eight states currently operate limited scope Medicaid family planning programs which extend access to family planning services to uninsured women who do not qualify for full Medicaid coverage because their incomes exceed the Medicaid income thresholds or they have lost Medicaid eligibility after having a baby and do not have a pathway stay on the program after the 60 day postpartum coverage period.

Maternity Care

Medicaid is the largest single payer of pregnancy-related services, financing 42% of all U.S. births in 2019. In six states Medicaid covers more than 60% of all births. By federal law, all states provide Medicaid coverage without cost sharing for pregnancy-related services to pregnant women with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL) and cover them up to 60 days postpartum. States now have the option to extend postpartum coverage beyond 60 days—as of January 2022, 25 states have taken steps to extend postpartum coverage.

  • Similar to family planning, there is no federal definition of what services states must cover under their traditional Medicaid programs for pregnant women beyond inpatient and outpatient hospital care, but states that have expanded Medicaid eligibility must cover all preventive services recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) to individuals who qualify through this pathway, which includes a broad range of preventive services for pregnant women. States may not charge cost-sharing for any pregnancy-related services. Overall, most states cover a broad range of maternity care services, including prenatal screenings, folic acid supplements, and breastfeeding supports.
  • In the 12 states that have not expanded Medicaid coverage under the ACA, many women lose their Medicaid eligibly 60 days post-partum because they no longer qualify for coverage, even though their infants are Medicaid eligible for their first year. This is because the income eligibility for pregnancy-related care is typically considerably higher than those offered to parents of dependent children. In the states that have expanded Medicaid eligibility, most women with Medicaid financed births are able to remain enrolled in the program and have continuous coverage and better access to care.
  • As a condition of receiving increased federal funding from the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, states must meet certain maintenance of eligibility requirements, including providing continuous coverage to Medicaid enrollees who have been enrolled in the program since March 18, 2020 until the end of the COVID19 public health emergency. As a result, postpartum women enrolled in Medicaid since March 2020 continue to have Medicaid coverage. Once the continuous coverage requirements end, however, many of these women are at risk of losing their Medicaid coverage, particularly those living in non-expansion states.
  • In recent years, there has been a growing interest in expanding postpartum Medicaid coverage beyond 60 days, in part due to the high rates of maternal mortality and morbidity in the United States and the disproportionately high rates of poor maternal outcomes experienced by Black and Native American pregnant people. The federal American Rescue Act of 2021, gives states the option to extend postpartum coverage to pregnant people to a full year. Coverage begins in April 2022 and states must provide a full-scope of benefits without limitations on coverage during the extension. To date, 21 states have taken steps to extend postpartum Medicaid coverage to 12 months—four additional states either limit the postpartum coverage periods to less the 12 months (GA, TX, WI) or only offer a limited benefits package for postpartum individuals with substance use disorder (MO).

Abortion

The federal Hyde Amendment prohibits federal spending on abortions, except when the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, or when it jeopardizes the life of the pregnant person (Figure 6). States may use their own unmatched funds to cover abortions in other circumstances. As of January 2022, 33 states and DC follow Hyde restrictions,16 states cover abortions for Medicaid beneficiaries that are considered to be “medically necessary” and pay for these using only state funds. One state, South Dakota, has not covered abortions in cases of rape or incest for 25 years. A January 2019 U.S. Government Accountability (GAO) report found that many states were not covering some abortions that were eligible for Medicaid coverage funding, in violation of federal law. In cases when Medicaid does cover abortions, reimbursement rates tend to be low and do not cover the full cost of the procedure.

In December 2021, the Supreme Court heard Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case that could overturn the constitutional right to abortion established by the decision in Roe v. Wade. If the court were to overturn the decision in Roe, availability of abortion would be severely limited and unavailable in many parts of the country. The federal Hyde rules would still apply for states that retain abortion availability, and states would still be able to use state dollars to pay for abortions beyond the Hyde restrictions.

Abortion Coverage is Very Limited Under Medicaid

Chronic Conditions

As women age, their health needs shift from reproductive care to greater need for screening and management of chronic diseases, mental health care, and disability care (although many women in their reproductive years also have these health needs).

Mental Health

  • In 2019, Medicaid covered one in four (24%) adult women with any mental illness and 30% of adult women with a serious mental illness.4 
  • Medicaid’s behavioral health benefits include acute care services, long-term services, and supports to enable people with chronic illness to receive community-based care. In addition, states with Medicaid expansion programs are required to cover 10 essential health benefits, which include mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment.

Breast and Cervical Cancers

  • Under the Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act, states may extend Medicaid coverage for cancer treatment to uninsured women diagnosed with breast or cervical cancer through a federal screening program and receive a federal match for those services. In 2019, over 43,000 women were enrolled in Medicaid through the Breast and Cervical Cancer Program.5 
  • Preventive services for breast and cervical cancers are required benefits in ACA Medicaid Expansion programs. States are required to cover mammograms and pap tests, genetic (BRCA) screening for high-risk women, and breast cancer preventive medication for high-risk women. Most states cover the screening tests for all beneficiaries. However, coverage for other services such as such as colposcopy following an abnormal pap result and genetic screening for women at higher risk of breast cancer is more uneven across state eligibility pathways.

Disability, Aging and Long-Term Care

Women with disabilities

  • Medicaid covers over four in ten (44%) nonelderly women with broad range of physical and mental disabilities, including physical impairments, severe mental illnesses, and specific conditions such as muscular dystrophy, cystic fibrosis, and HIV/AIDS. In addition, Medicaid also covers some nonelderly women who separately also qualify for Medicare coverage due to long-term disabilities (discussed below).
  • Benefits that Medicaid covers include: assistance with medical and supportive services including rehabilitation, transportation, and therapeutic services, which help people with disabilities live independently and are not typically covered by private health insurance plans. Long-term services, including home health care, are another critical health benefit for women with disabilities that has very limited coverage through commercial plans but is covered by Medicaid.
Medicaid Covers Over Four In Ten Women with Disabilities

Medicare-Medicaid Enrollees and LONG-TERM Care

Medicare provides health coverage to people 65 and older and younger people with long-term disabilities. In 2019, Medicaid provided coverage to more than 12 million Medicare beneficiaries (20% of all Medicare beneficiaries) with low incomes and modest assets. Of this total, women of all ages account for 59% of this group (women 65 and older account for 40%) (Figure 8).6  Many of these beneficiaries have extensive and costly health needs.

  • The majority of dually eligible beneficiaries qualify for full Medicaid benefits and may receive coverage for services that Medicare does not currently cover, such as dental and vision care, and long-term services and supports. Other dually eligible beneficiaries may only receive assistance with their Medicare premiums and/or cost sharing through the Medicare Savings Programs, but not full Medicaid benefits, if they meet an income and asset test.
Women Account for Nearly Six in Ten Medicare Beneficiaries Who are Enrolled in Both Medicare and Medicaid
  • Medicaid covers a continuum of long-term services and supports ranging from home and community based services (HCBS) that allow persons to live independently in their own homes or in other community settings to institutional care provided in nursing facilities and intermediate care facilities for individuals with intellectual disabilities. In FY2019, HCBS represented 59% of total Medicaid expenditures on long-term services and supports (LTSS).
  • Since women are more likely to live longer and experience higher rates of chronic illness and disability than men, they are more likely to require long-term services in their lifetime. Approximately two-thirds of nursing home residents (65%) and people receiving home health care (61%) are women. Medicaid coverage provides access to these long-term services, which would otherwise be unaffordable for women with fixed incomes (in 2020, nursing home care averaged more than $93,075 annually for a semi-private room).

Access to Care

Compared to their uninsured counterparts, women with Medicaid experience fewer barriers to care and on several measures have utilization rates comparable to low-income women with private insurance.

  • Women on Medicaid use primary and preventive health services, such as pap smears and mammograms, at rates comparable to women with private insurance and at higher rates than uninsured women (Figure 9).
Figure 9: Low-Income Women with Medicaid Use Preventive Care at Similar Rates to those with Private Coverage
  • Women on Medicaid are less likely than uninsured women to experience cost barriers. Compared to low-income women with private insurance, women on Medicaid were less likely to report that they delayed or went without care due to cost, likely attributable to the fact that Medicaid does not charge deductibles, rarely charges premiums and has only nominal cost-sharing. Affordability, however, is still a problem for some women in the program because they are typically low-income and have to pay out of pocket costs in states that impose caps on the number of covered visits or prescriptions or charge copayments for prescription drugs (for non-pregnant adults). One in 10 low-income women on Medicaid report that they had not filled a prescription (10%) in the past year because of the cost (Figure 10).
Figure 10: Compared to Uninsured, Lower Shares of Women with Medicaid and Private Coverage Report Delaying or Not Getting Care Because of Cost
Table 1: Medicaid Coverage Among Women in 2020, by Selected Characteristics
  1. 138% of FPL in 2021 is $17,774 for an individual and $30,305 for a family of three. ↩︎
  2. KFF analysis of calendar year 2019 TMSIS. ↩︎
  3. FY 2022 FMAPs reflect higher federal matching funding made available through the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (amended by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act). The additional funds are available to states from January 1, 2020 until the end of the public health emergency period for the COVID-19 pandemic. This act provided a 6.2 percentage-point increase to all FMAP rates for all states (including DC). For more information on the FMAP increase during the COVID-19 pandemic, see Key Questions About the New Increase in Federal Medicaid Matching Funds for COVID-19. ↩︎
  4. KFF analysis of National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2019. ↩︎
  5. KFF analysis of calendar year 2019 TMSIS. ↩︎
  6. Ibid. ↩︎

Family Planning and Contraceptive Provision Among Females Enrolled in Medicaid

Published: Feb 17, 2022

Introduction

Family planning services, which include contraceptive services and supplies as well as a broader set of services related to sexual and reproductive health, are key preventive services for women. Most women (87%) use contraception at some point and on average, women report using 3.4 methods of contraception throughout their lifetime. For low-income women in particular, Medicaid plays a major role in financing family planning services. Recognizing the importance of contraception and family planning services, federal Medicaid law classifies family planning services and supplies as a “mandatory” benefit category that states must cover. Federal Medicaid law has other protections that promote access to family planning services that:

  • Prohibit providers from charging copayments or any other form of patient cost sharing for family planning services
  • Establish a 90% federal matching rate (FMAP) for the costs of services classified as family planning, a higher rate than for other services
  • Entitle beneficiaries to obtain family planning services from any provider that participates in the Medicaid program, called free choice of provider, including for beneficiaries enrolled in managed care organizations (MCOs)

All states cover prescription contraceptives for women, but they may limit access through utilization controls. Additionally, about half of states offer a range of family planning benefits including contraceptive services and supplies to individuals who do not otherwise qualify for full Medicaid coverage. States can establish these family planning programs by receiving permission from the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) through a Section 1115 waiver or by amending their Medicaid programs with a State Plan Amendment (SPA). Recognizing the importance of contraceptive services for women, CMS recently added two measures of contraceptive care to the core health care quality measures, known as the Adult and Child Core Sets. These measures assess provision of the most and moderately effective contraceptive methods (i.e., sterilization, intrauterine devices (IUDs), implants, injectables (e.g., Depo-Provera), oral pills, patch, or ring) to female beneficiaries.

Despite the special status of family planning services under Medicaid, very little is known about the provision of these services to Medicaid beneficiaries. To better understand the level of use of these services and to explore the variation in utilization across states, we examine the provision of contraceptive services and supplies, as well as provision of family planning services more broadly to reproductive age women (ages 15 to 49) continuously covered by Medicaid in 2018. We present new national and state-level data by age as well as comparisons by region. This analysis is based on claims data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) and is based on data from 43 states and the District of Columbia. Seven states are excluded due to concerns about data quality.

Findings

Among females ages 15-49 continuously enrolled in Medicaid in 2018, we looked at family planning service provision and contraceptive service provision (Table 1). Contraceptive services for this analysis included drugs, devices, procedures, and counseling intended to prevent pregnancy. Family planning services were defined to include all contraceptive services as well as related services to prevent and screen for some sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV, as well as gynecological exams and Pap smears.

Table 1: Services Included in T-MSIS Analysis of Family Planning and Contraceptive Services

By looking at service provision among those who were continuously enrolled in Medicaid, we minimize the impact of coverage churning, which can limit access to care.

One in four (25%) female Medicaid enrollees of reproductive age (ages 15 to 49) obtained at least one contraceptive service in 2018.This share varied considerably, ranging from 18% in Arkansas and Arizona to 34% in Wisconsin (Figure 1). These percentages represent the share of females overall provided these services, which may include women who were pregnant during the year and not in need of contraceptive services.

Contraceptive provision was on average almost twice as high among females ages 15-29 (32%) than females ages 30-49 (18%). There was considerable variation in these rates by age across states with less than a quarter (22%) of females ages 15-29 in Texas receiving contraceptive services compared to nearly half of their counterparts in Vermont (46%). Among females ages 30-49, only 9% received contraceptive services in Arkansas compared to a quarter (25%) in Wisconsin.

Figure 1: Share of Females Ages 15 to 49 Enrolled in Medicaid Who were Provided Contraceptive Care

When looking more broadly at family planning services including screenings for sexually transmitted infections and cervical cancer in addition to contraceptive services, just under 4 in 10 females ages 15-49 (38%) were provided family planning services. This ranged from a low of 22% in Arkansas to a high of 49% in Connecticut (Figure 2). Younger females ages 15-29 were on average, 1.3 times more likely to receive family planning services compared to those ages 30-49 (42% vs. 35%). Among females ages 15-29, family planning service provision ranged from a low of 27% in Texas to a high of 54% in Vermont. The range was slightly wider among females ages 30-49 with 14% receiving family planning services in Arkansas compared to 46% in Connecticut.

Figure 2: Share of Females Ages 15 to 49 Enrolled in Medicaid Who were Provided Family Planning Services

Many factors can contribute to state level variation in provision of services, including eligibility levels, Medicaid utilization controls, access to clinicians, the availability of services, clinician practices, payment rates, beneficiaries’ needs and preferences, and more.

Nationally, the most commonly provided method of contraception to female Medicaid beneficiaries was oral contraceptives, which is also the most commonly used reversible contraceptive among females in the general population. Nearly half of women provided contraceptive services in Medicaid in 2018 obtained contraceptive pills (48%), followed by injectable contraception (20%), and then intrauterine devices (12%) (Figure 3). Approximately one in five (21%) females obtained a long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) in 2018, which includes IUDs and implants.

Among those continuously enrolled in Medicaid, only 4% of women had a diagnosis or procedure code for female sterilization in 2018. Since sterilization is a one-time procedure, women who were sterilized in earlier years would not show up in the current measurement year. Combined with IUDs and implants, one quarter of contraceptive users was provided a “most effective” method in 2018 (e.g., sterilization, contraceptive implants, intrauterine devices or systems (IUD/IUS)). Five percent of females was provided emergency contraceptive pills. Less than 5% of females were provided the other methods – patch, ring, diaphragm, or fertility awareness-based counseling.

For the following figures on contraceptive method provided, women could have more than one method within the year.

Share of Females Ages 15-49 Continuously Enrolled in Medicaid Provided Each Contraceptive Service, Calendar Year 2018

Contraceptive provision differs by age. Younger females in their teens and 20s had higher provision of oral contraceptives and lower use of sterilization than females in their 30s and 40s. Preferences regarding the type of contraceptive method often differs by a person’s age and the length of time they desire to prevent pregnancy. Not surprisingly, a larger share of females ages 30-49 received a sterilization procedure in the year, compared to females ages 15-29, who had higher use of reversible methods such as contraceptive implants, injectables, and oral contraceptive pills (Figure 4). Interestingly, about one in five females in each age group obtained a LARC (IUDs and implants) during the calendar year. The provision of contraceptive patches and rings was similarly low among both age groups. Less than 1% of females in each age group were provided a diaphragm. Similarly, a small share of females received fertility awareness-based counseling (1%) in each age group. Finally, 5% of females ages 15-29 and 4% of females ages 30-49 were provided a prescription for emergency contraception pills. Since emergency contraceptive pills can purchased over the counter without a prescription, some  women may have used the pills but this would not be reflected in this claims database. For Medicaid to cover the costs of the pills, however, enrollees need to have a prescription.

Contraceptive Method Provided by Age Among Females Ages 15-49 Continuously Enrolled in Medicaid, Calendar Year 2018

There are some notable regional differences in the provision of contraceptive methods, particularly for oral contraceptives, injectables, and emergency contraceptive pills. We compared differences in types of contraceptives that were provided in the four census regions: West, South, Midwest, and Northeast (Figure 5), excluding FL, KY, MS, NE, OK, UT, WY due to concerns about data quality. The share of women provided sterilization in 2018 was highest in the South (5%), but similar across regions (4% in Midwest, 3% in West, and 3% in Northeast). The share of women provided an intrauterine device was lowest in the South (9% compared to 11% in Midwest, 12% in Northeast, and 13% in West) and the share receiving a contraceptive implant was lowest in the Northeast (7% compared to 9% in Midwest, 9% in South, and 11% in West). The largest differences were in the shares provided injectable contraception, with the highest share being in the South (27%) compared to 15% in the West. The share of women provided contraceptive pills was lowest in the South (42%) and highest in the Northeast (52%). The share of women provided emergency contraception was lower in the South (1%) compared to the West (7%), Midwest (5%), and Northeast (6%). There were not substantial regional differences in the shares of women provided the contraceptive patch, contraceptive ring, diaphragm, and fertility awareness-based counseling.

Contraceptive Provision Among Females Ages 15-49 Continuously Enrolled in Medicaid by Census Region, Calendar Year 2018

Discussion

Given the central role of Medicaid in financing family planning services for low-income women, it is important to understand what family planning service and contraceptive service provision looks like across states. While these are important services for many women, not all women need or want to use contraception. Our overall finding that 25% of reproductive age women were provided a contraceptive service is consistent with rates recently published by CMS, where 25.3% of women ages 21 to 44 at risk of unintended pregnancy were provided a “most effective” or “moderately effective” method of contraception. It is unclear whether the remaining women, who represent the majority of reproductive age women on Medicaid encounter access barriers or a lack of availability, or whether they feel they do not need or do not wish to use contraceptive services, or some other reason.  Some of these women may be pregnant or trying to get pregnant and do not need contraception.  Others may be using over-the-counter methods such as condoms or spermicide.

It is notable that there are considerable differences in provision of family planning and contraceptive services and supplies by age. A higher share of women in their teens and 20’s received contraceptive and family planning services compared to women over the age of the 30. This could partially be explained by higher shares of women over age 30 having had sterilization procedures in previous years as well as greater reliance on longer acting contraceptive methods, like IUDs which can last up to 10 years depending on the type of IUD. Regardless of age, contraceptive pills remain the most frequently provided contraceptive method within Medicaid overall, followed by injectable contraception (e.g., Depo-Provera).

Another notable finding is the substantial state variation in the share of women provided contraceptive and family planning services. Similar to our findings, an analysis of contraceptive utilization in 37 states using the 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) among women with different insurance types found lower contraceptive use among women aged 18-49 in the South compared to the West. Some of the states that we found to have the highest and lowest shares of contraceptive use among women with Medicaid were also found to have higher and lower shares of contraceptive use in the BRFSS data, including higher shares in Wisconsin and lower shares in Arizona and Arkansas.

These differences by state could reflect the variation in the adoption of policies and programs to increase access to contraception, including those from public health practitioners, clinicians, and state and federal policymakers. Many initiatives to expand contraceptive access have focused on expanding access to postpartum LARCs. Notably, many states revised their payment policies to make it easier for providers to get reimbursed for immediate postpartum LARCs outside of the global maternity care fee. For example, Louisiana and South Carolina, states that implemented a separate payment structure for postpartum LARC insertions were found to have the highest rates of effective contraceptive provision 60 days postpartum among Medicaid enrollees in 2016. These states also had considerably higher contraceptive provision than their neighboring states in our analysis.

Furthermore, state adoption of utilization control policies can also shape access and availability of contraceptive methods. These policies include prior authorization for certain methods like emergency contraception, step therapy that require beneficiaries to use contraceptives off a Preferred Drug List before being able to use another method of choice and limiting the amount of supply a beneficiary can receive at one time, such as a 1-month or 3-month supply rather than the recommended 12-month supply.

Due to the personal nature of reproductive health care choices including contraceptive use and the history of reproductive coercion in many communities in the US, there is no agreed upon benchmark for contraceptive provision and method mix. However, information about the provision of services and how use varies by state and populations provides policymakers and clinicians important insights about the differences across states and sets a baseline for the study of future policy changes and initiatives.

Methods

This analysis is based on claims data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) Research Identifiable Files (RIF). Data for 2018 were from the final version (Release 1) of these files. This analysis was limited to females ages 15-49 continuously enrolled in Medicaid with no more than a 45-day gap in enrollment during the year. This definition of continuous enrollment was chosen to align with CMS’ Adult and Child Set Core Measures, specifically, those around contraceptive provision, and to give people sufficient time in Medicaid to access contraceptive and family planning services.

We excluded the following states from our analysis due to concerns with the quality of their enrollment data: Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming. We relied on data quality assessments from DQ Atlas to exclude states based on data quality ratings of the following indicators: (1) Enrollment Benchmarking: Medium concern for Total Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment (Mississippi, Nebraska, and Kentucky), (2) Enrollment Patterns Over Time: Number of Enrollment Spans - % of Beneficiaries with Only One Enrollment Span in Year ≥ 99.8 (Florida, Wyoming), (3) Enrollment Patterns Over Time: Number of Enrollment Spans - % Beneficiaries with 3 or More Enrollment Spans in Year ≥ 5% (Oklahoma). Additionally, we excluded Utah because of a substantially lower rate of continuous enrollment, which may be due to an administrative error where a large number of enrollees were disenrolled from April 31, 2018 to June 1, 2018. The analysis was limited to 2018 claims, so enrollees that may have been enrolled in the previous or subsequent year but had more than one 45-day gap in enrollment in 2018 were truncated and excluded from the continuously enrolled population for the 2018 calendar year. Data reflect enrollment in any eligibility pathway as well as any payment structure (FFS, managed care, etc.)

Contraceptive claims were captured from the 2018 T-MSIS header and line files for “other services” claims and prescription drug claims, as well as the header files for inpatient claims for provision of female sterilization, intrauterine devices (IUDs), contraceptive implants, injectables, contraceptive pills, contraceptive patches, contraceptive rings, diaphragms, male and female condoms, emergency contraception, counseling for fertility-awareness based methods, contraceptive counseling, and contraceptive management and surveillance of other contraceptives. Family planning services included any contraceptive claims, as well as claims for sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening, gynecological exams and pap smears, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) counseling and screening, and Human Papillomavirus (HPV) screening. According to the DQATLAS, the following states had unusable data for one or more files: Rhode Island (inpatient claims volume), Tennessee (inpatient diagnosis codes), Maryland (inpatient procedure codes), and Utah (other services professional procedure codes). Since the other data, particularly for the “other services” files and RX files where the majority of family planning and contraceptive service claims are found, we did not exclude any states based on these ratings.

The share of beneficiaries provided contraceptive services included any female ages 15-49 continuously enrolled in Medicaid with at least one contraceptive service claim in 2018. The share provided family planning services included any female ages 15-49 continuously enrolled in Medicaid with at least one claim for contraceptive services, sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening, gynecological exams and pap smears, HIV counseling and screening, and HPV screening. A list of diagnosis, procedure, and drug codes that were used for this analysis are available upon request.

Appendix Tables

Appendix Table 1: Contraceptive Service Provision Among Females Ages 15-49 Continuously Enrolled in Medicaid, Calendar Year 2018
Appendix Table 2. Family Planning Service Provision Among Females Ages 15-49 Continuously Enrolled in Medicaid, Calendar Year 2018
News Release

Analysis Finds The Share of Nursing Home Staff Who Have Been Vaccinated Against COVID-19 Varies Substantially by State

Vaccination Mandate Has Been the Focus of Litigation By Some States

Published: Feb 17, 2022

The share of nursing home staffers who have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 varies considerably by state, from 70 percent in Ohio to 99 percent in Maine, Rhode Island, New York and Massachusetts, a new KFF analysis finds. The national average is 84 percent.

The analysis of federal nursing home data for the week ending Jan. 30 comes as providers strive to comply with a federal mandate that health care workers whose employers participate in Medicare or Medicaid be vaccinated against the novel coronavirus. Although some states have sued to challenge this rule, the Supreme Court recently let it go into effect.

Facilities in different states have different deadlines to comply with the mandate, in part due to ongoing state litigation challenging the federal rule. Deadlines for workers to have received their first dose ranged from January 27 to February 21, depending on the state. States with earlier deadlines generally reported higher completed staff vaccination rates than states with later deadlines.

Facilities won’t face enforcement action from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services if more than 80 percent of their staff receive their first dose by their deadline, and they have a plan to achieve a 100 percent single-dose staff vaccination rate within 60 days.

The analysis is based on 10,627 nursing homes reporting complete vaccination data, or about 70 percent of all nursing homes nationally.

People With HIV in Non-Medicaid Expansion States: Who Could Gain Coverage Eligibility Through Build Back Better or Future Expansion?

Published: Feb 15, 2022

People with HIV living in the 12 states that have not adopted the Medicaid expansion face limited access to health coverage. In 2018, across sampled states, 20% of people with HIV living in non-expansion states were uninsured compared to 6% in expansion states, and those in expansion states were more likely to have Medicaid coverage (46% v 30%). Moreover, some adults with incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level (FPL) in non-expansion states fall into the “coverage gap”, where they do not qualify for Medicaid through an existing pathway and are not eligible for marketplace subsidies.

Figure 1: Insurance Coverage Among Adults with HIV by State Medicaid Expansion Status, 2018

One provision in the Build Back Better Act (BBBA), as passed by the House of Representatives, aims to temporarily close the coverage gap, although its prospects are uncertain as negotiations continue in the Senate. It would temporarily create new coverage opportunities, including by providing a low-cost (with zero premiums) marketplace alternative for those with incomes below 100% FPL who are not otherwise eligible for Medicaid. The BBBA includes a provision to encourage states that have already expanded to maintain that status. In addition, the BBBA would also enhance cost-sharing subsidies provided under the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) to those with incomes between 100-138% FPL.

In this analysis, we explore the implications of the BBBA’s current coverage provisions for people with HIV in select non-expansion states. We estimate the size of the population that could gain eligibility as well as their socio-demographic characteristics and examine their affordability barriers, compared to people with HIV overall. We also discuss the implications of such policy changes for the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, the nation’s HIV safety-net program. To do so, we used data from the Centers for Disease Control’s and Prevention’s (CDC) Medical Monitoring Project (MMP), a surveillance system which produces national and state-level representative estimates of behavioral and clinical characteristics of adults with diagnosed HIV in the United States. The MMP sample includes five of the twelve non-expansion states –  Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Texas – which together account for about 84% of people living with diagnosed HIV in non-expansion states.

We defined the group who could benefit from key BBBA coverage provisions as non-elderly adults with HIV with incomes below 139% FPL who were either uninsured or had health coverage other than from Medicaid or Medicare. Notably, this is the same population that could gain eligibility for coverage if their states expanded their Medicaid programs. (See Methodology for detail.)

Findings

Overall, we find that an estimated 55,132 (or 23%) of non-elderly individuals with HIV in sampled non-expansion states could gain eligibility for new or enhanced subsidies under the BBBA. This is also the population that could gain Medicaid eligibility, if these states expanded their programs. The share ranges by state, from an estimated 18% in both North Carolina and Georgia to 28% in Texas. (See Table 1.)

Table 1: Estimated Percent and Number of People with HIV Who Could Gain Coverage Eligibility, by State
StatePercentageEstimated Number
Florida22%20,561
Georgia18%8,556
Mississippi22%1,783
North Carolina18%4,328
Texas28%19,905
Overall23%55,132

How this 23% could be impacted by BBBA is as follows. As noted, the BBBA would provide those with incomes below 100% FPL, including uninsured people in the coverage gap, with marketplace subsidies and cost-sharing assistance, making private insurance premiums free and cost-sharing minimal. We estimate that approximately 47,078 (or 16%) of non-elderly adults with HIV in the sampled non-expansion states would become eligible for this provision. BBBA would also enhance subsidies for those 100-138% FPL and we estimate beyond this 16%, an additional 7% of non-elderly people with HIV in non-expansion states would be eligible for these enhanced subsidies. Notably, BBBA provisions are temporary, and set to expire in 2025 unless renewed. Under a scenario where all sampled states expanded their Medicaid program, the full 23% of non-elderly people with HIV could gain Medicaid eligibility.

Characteristics of people with HIV who could gain eligibility for new or enhanced coverage

Non-elderly people with HIV in these states who could gain new coverage eligibility, including enhanced subsidies under the BBBA or through Medicaid expansion, are more likely to be under 50 years old, people of color, and uninsured compared to non-elderly people with HIV overall (Table 2):

  • 66% are under 50 years old (compared to 52% of all non-elderly people with HIV)
  • 86% are non-White, including 55% who are Black/African American (compared to 72% and 42% of all non-elderly people with HIV)
  • 59% are uninsured (compared to 26% of all people with HIV), 26% have any private insurance, of which 32% have marketplace coverage (compared to 61% and 18%, respectively, of all non-elderly people with HIV) and 15% have other coverage (similar to the 13% among all non-elderly people with HIV)
Table 2: Characteristics of Non-elderly People with HIV Who Could Gain New or Enhanced Coverage Eligibility and Characteristics of All Non-elderly People with HIV
CharacteristicPotentially Eligible People with HIV in Non-expansion StatesAll Non-elderly People with HIV
Age: Under 5066%52%
Race/ethnicity: BIPOC86%72%
Insurance Coverage: Uninsured59%26%
Insurance Coverage: Any private

Of which is Marketplace

26%

32%

61%

18%

Insurance Coverage: Other coverage apart from Medicare15%13%

Addressing Affordability Barriers

Potentially eligible people with HIV in sampled non-expansion states are more likely to face certain affordability barriers compared to people with HIV overall. Approximately one in three (31%) of those in this potentially eligible group report being unable to pay health care bills during the past 12 months and 30% say they currently have unpaid medical bills. By comparison, 20% of non-elderly adults with HIV overall report being unable to pay health care bills during the past 12 months and 23% report they currently have unpaid medical bills. Smaller but comparable shares of those potentially eligible and people with HIV overall say they have taken the following measures to save money on medication: Skipped doses (8% v 6%), took less medicine than prescribed (7% v 6%), delayed filling a prescription (11% v 8%), asked a doctor for lower cost medication (10% for both), or used alternative therapies (6% v 4%). (Table 3.)

Table 3: Health Care Affordability Challenges Among People with HIV Who Could Gain New or Enhanced Coverage Eligibility and Characteristics of All Non-elderly People with HIV
CharacteristicPotentially Eligible People with HIV in Non-expansion StatesAll Non-elderly People with HIV
Inability to pay healthcare bills31%20%
Currently have unpaid medical bills30%23%
Skipped doses to save money8%6%
Took less medicine to save money7%6%
Delayed filling prescription to save money11%8%
Asked doctor for lower cost medication to save money10%10%
Used alternative therapies to save money6%4%

The Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program

The Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program plays a key role in the lives of about half of all people with HIV in the U.S., and an especially important role in providing HIV care and treatment for those in non-expansion states in the coverage gap. We find that seventy percent (70%) of those who could gain new coverage opportunities under BBB or Medicaid expansion currently receive support from Ryan White, compared to 46% of non-elderly people with HIV overall, with Ryan White supporting a range of outpatient HIV services including medications although it cannot pay for non-HIV care. As such, if this group gains coverage, it could mean that state programs could shift limited Ryan White resources to expand support services that were not possible to finance in the past. In fact, people with HIV with all insurance coverage types and Ryan White experience higher rates of sustained viral suppression (an indicator for health and preventing transmission) than those with only insurance coverage and no support from the program, in large part due to these supportive, wrap around services.

Discussion

We estimate that if the BBBA, as passed by the House, was enacted almost a quarter (23%) of non-elderly people with HIV in select non-expansion states could become eligible for these new coverage opportunities. This is the same share estimated to become eligible through Medicaid expansion which could be a potentially more stable coverage pathway given the currently time limited nature of the BBBA. Given high rates of uninsurance among people with HIV in non-expansion states and the prevalence of problems with medical bills, coverage gains could improve health access and affordability. And since people with HIV in non-expansion states are disproportionally people of color, new coverage opportunities could also help to address health disparities at the intersection of HIV and race/ethnicity. Coverage expansions through either pathway (the BBBA or Medicaid expansion) may also relieve the Ryan White Program from financing HIV care and treatment, allowing it to provide more robust support services, which could lead to improved care outcomes for people with HIV. In addition, a shift to coverage could mean that those previously in without affordable insurance could access care for non-HIV care needs that in the past would have not been addressed through the Ryan White Program.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Dr. Sharoda Dasgupta, Dr. Linda Beer, Tamara Carree, and Stacy Crim of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), who were instrumental in this work in providing access to data, guidance, and conducting statistical analysis.

This work was supported in part by the Elton John AIDS Foundation. We value our funders. KFF maintains full editorial control over all of its policy analysis, polling, and journalism activities.

Methodology

Data on people with HIV are based on 2018 and 2019 data cycles from the Medical Monitoring Project (MMP), a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) surveillance system which produces national and state-level representative estimates of behavioral and clinical characteristics of adults with diagnosed HIV in the United States.

MMP employs a two-stage, complex sampling design. First, jurisdictions are selected from all U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico using a probability proportional to size sampling strategy based on AIDS prevalence at the end of 2002, such that areas with higher prevalence had a higher probability of selection. Next, adults (aged 18 years and older) with diagnosed HIV were sampled from selected jurisdictions from the National HIV Surveillance System (NHSS), a census of US persons with diagnosed HIV. During 2018 and 2019, data come from: California (including the separately funded jurisdictions of Los Angeles County and San Francisco), Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois (including the separately funded jurisdiction of Chicago), Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York (including the separately funded jurisdiction of New York City), North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania (including the separately funded jurisdiction of Philadelphia), Puerto Rico, Texas (including the separately funded jurisdiction of Houston), Virginia, and Washington.

Data used in this analysis were collected via telephone or face-to-face interviews and medical record abstractions during the following periods:

  • 2018 data was collected between June 1, 2018 – May 31, 2019
  • 2019 data was collected between June 1, 2019–May 31, 2020
  • The response rate was 100% at the first stage, and was 45% for each of the 2 cycles included in this analysis. Data were weighted based on known probabilities of selection at state or territory and patient levels. In addition, data were weighted to adjust for non-response using predictors of person-level response, and post-stratified to NHSS population totals by age, race/ethnicity, and sex at birth. This analysis includes information on 7,037 non-elderly adults (those under 65 years of age) with HIV. Data presented on non-expansion states are representative of only those states sampled.

Analysis

For all non-elderly respondents in MMP, we examined self-reported insurance coverage. Response options included insurance programs (Medicaid, Medicare, private insurance – employer and marketplace -, Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program – Ryan White or the AIDS Drug Assistance Program-, Veteran’s Administration, Tricare or CHAMPUS coverage, other public insurance, and other unspecified insurance). “Other specify” responses were recoded to reflect the most accurate coverage type when possible.

We estimated weighted percentages of individuals with the following types of health care coverage: no coverage (uninsured), private insurance (with breakouts for employer coverage and marketplace coverage), Medicaid, Medicare, and other. Because respondents in MMP may indicate more than one type of coverage, we relied on a hierarchy to group people into mutually exclusive coverage categories. After removing people with any Medicaid or Medicare coverage, we categorized people into coverage according to the following hierarchy:

  • Private coverage overall (with non-mutually exclusive breakouts for employer coverage and marketplace coverage)
  • Other public coverage, including Tricare/CHAMPUS, Veteran’s Administration, or city/county coverage
  • Uninsured

In most cases, this hierarchy classified individuals according to the coverage source that served as their primary payer. People who did not report any of the sources of insurance coverage were classified as uninsured.

Medicaid expansion status was identified based on KFF data. While Virginia was a non-expansion state during half of the 2018 cycle, it expanded its program and coverage became effective January 2019. Virginia was coded here as an expansion state given the forward-looking nature of this analysis.

People with HIV in non-expansion states were identified as potentially eligible for BBB assistance or Medicaid based on their state of residence, if they were under the age of 65, had incomes between 0-138% FPL, and had insurance other than Medicare or Medicaid or were uninsured. Build Back Better eligibility was also assessed to capture the estimated number and share in the coverage using the same criteria but with the poverty threshold being 0-99% FPL.

Limitations

Although MMP is based on a probability sample that allows for reporting of nationally representative estimates of characteristics among people with HIV, people were not sampled with respect to Medicaid expansion status of their state of residence. Therefore, the Medicaid expansion and non-expansion coverage data presented here are representative only of the subset of states sampled that fell into each group. Insurance coverage data is self-reported by respondents and not verified. Receipt of Ryan White support is also self-reported. By relying on a hierarchy to group individuals into coverage categories, it is possible individuals were grouped into a coverage category that was not their dominant payer over the course of a year. We were unable to identify immigrants who would be ineligible for Medicaid based on immigration status but previous work suggests this percentage is likely small and would not have substantially impacted estimates. In addition, some people who are currently uninsured may already be eligible for Medicaid or other coverage. However, we expect that share to be low for several reasons. First, even prior to Medicaid expansion opportunities becoming available, the disability pathway was the most common way people with HIV became eligible for Medicaid coverage. All five states sampled use autoenrollment for people with SSI therefore limiting those eligible but not enrolled in the program. Second, Ryan White acts of payer of last resort and grantees are required to regularly assess clients for eligibility for health coverage. Given that 82% of uninsured people receive Ryan White support and the majority of the potentially eligible group identified here are uninsured, the program would likely have already identified potential coverage opportunities and assisted with enrollment, including through Medicaid, where possible. It is also important to note that respondents may not be aware of all the services they receive that are paid for by the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (the program provides funding directly to service organizations in many cases) and therefore, the estimates of the number of individuals who receive Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program services is likely an underestimate.

Diversity of Under-5 Age Group Varies Across States

Authors: Jason Millman, Jennifer Kates, and Robin Rudowitz
Published: Feb 10, 2022

Prioritizing equity will be a key component of the anticipated rollout of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine to children under 5 years old, which could be authorized as early as next week. Of the 19 million children under 5 in the United States, half are children of color, making this group more diverse than the U.S. population overall (40%).

There is also significant variation across the country. In five states and Washington, DC, children of color account for at least two-thirds of all children in this age group: Hawaii, New Mexico, California, Texas, and Nevada. In eight other states, the share is above half: Arizona, Florida, Maryland, Georgia, New Jersey, New York, Delaware, and Mississippi.

While Black and Hispanic people during the pandemic have been less likely than their White counterparts to have received a COVID-19 vaccine, racial disparities in vaccination rates have narrowed over time and have closed for Hispanic people. Our recent brief on the upcoming vaccination roll-out to young children discusses the importance of addressing potential access barriers and enlisting trusted community messengers to mitigate similar disparities in vaccination rates among this group.

Outpatient telehealth use soared early in the COVID-19 pandemic but has since receded

Authors: Justin Lo, Matthew Rae, Krutika Amin, and Cynthia Cox
Published: Feb 10, 2022

Telehealth use skyrocketed during the early months of the pandemic. While it has since decreased somewhat from that high, it still represents a much more substantial share of health care than before COVID, this KFF-Epic Research analysis finds.

From March through August 2021, 8% of all outpatient visits were conducted via telehealth– down from 13% in the first six months of the pandemic, but well above pre-pandemic levels, when telehealth accounted for a negligible share of outpatient visits.

The report also looks at telehealth use by chronic condition and by gender and summarizes potential implications for expanded telehealth use for access, costs and quality of care, as well as the regulatory environment likely to affect telehealth in the future.

The analysis can be found on the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker, an information hub dedicated to monitoring and assessing the performance of the U.S. health system.

News Release

Telehealth Accounted for 8% of Outpatient Visits More Than a Year into COVID-19 Pandemic, Suggesting a More Permanent Shift in How Patients Receive Care

Published: Feb 10, 2022

Telehealth use skyrocketed during the early months of the pandemic. While it has since decreased somewhat from that high, it still represents a much more substantial share of health care than before COVID, a new KFF-Epic Research analysis finds.

From March through August 2021, 8% of all outpatient visits were conducted via telehealth – down from 13% in the first six months of the pandemic, but well above pre-pandemic levels, when telehealth accounted for a negligible share of outpatient visits (rounding to 0%).

The analysis examines data from Cosmos, Epic’s HIPAA-defined limited data set of more than 126 million patients from hospitals and clinics across the country. Other findings include:

  • Adults ages 65 and older relied on telehealth for a smaller share (5%) of outpatient visits between March and August 2021 than younger adults (8%) and children (11%).
  • Patients in rural and urban areas used telehealth at similar rates during the six-month period (10% and 8%, respectively).

The report also looks at telehealth use by chronic condition and by gender and summarizes potential implications for expanded telehealth use for access, costs and quality of care, as well as the regulatory environment likely to affect telehealth in the future.

The report is available through the KFF-Peterson Health System Tracker, an online information hub that monitors and assesses the performance of the U.S. health system.

Medicaid Financing and the U.S. Territories: Implications of The Build Back Better Act

Authors: Lina Stolyar and Robin Rudowitz
Published: Feb 9, 2022

The U.S territories – American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) – have faced an array of longstanding fiscal and health challenges that were exacerbated by recent natural disasters and the COVID-19 pandemic. Over time, Congress has provided additional federal funding often to address emergencies and additional financing needs beyond the Medicaid allotments set in law. Recent funding increases were set to expire at the end of FY 2021, but administrative action helped to avoid a sharp decline in federal Medicaid financing at the end of FY 2021. The Build Back Better Act (BBBA) includes a permanent statutory increase to the territories’ Medicaid allotments and match rates. This policy watch examines how Medicaid funding for the territories works, the current allotments, and how BBBA would change Medicaid funding for the territories going forward. While a version of BBBA has passed the house, its fate in the Senate remains uncertain.

Unlike in the 50 states and D.C., annual federal funding for Medicaid in the U.S. territories is subject to a statutory cap and fixed matching rate. Both the capped federal allotment (known as the Section 1108 allotment) and the territories’ federal matching rate (known as the federal medical assistance percentage, or FMAP) are fixed in statute. This funding arrangement is unlike federal Medicaid funding for states where federal dollars are uncapped and the FMAP is adjusted annually based on a state’s relative per capita income. Once a territory exhausts its capped federal funds, it no longer receives federal financial support for its Medicaid program during that fiscal year.

Over time, Congress has provided increases in federal funds for the territories broadly and in response to specific emergency events. Most recently, the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020 and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) significantly increased the allotments for each of the territories for FY 2020 and FY 2021 (seven to nine times the statutory levels) and also raised the FMAP rates from the statutory level of 55% to 76% for Puerto Rico and 83% for the other territories. These statutory changes to the allotments and the match rate expired at the end of September. However, like other states, the territories are also eligible to receive a 6.2 percentage point increase to the statutory Medicaid match rate through the end of the quarter in which the public health emergency (PHE) expires if certain maintenance of eligibility requirements are met.

At the end of September 2021, CMS calculated FY 2022 allotments for the territories based on allotments for FY 2021 (except for Puerto Rico where calculations were based on allotments for FY 2020). These calculations helped to avoid a fiscal cliff in federal Medicaid funding for the territories that could have resulted in significant reductions to eligibility levels and benefits. These calculations represent increases of around 3% for all territories compared to their FY 2021 allotment except for Puerto Rico, which would see a decrease of around 2% from FY 2021 (Figure 1). In November 2021, the GAO released a non-binding legal opinion that CMS did not have the authority to adjust the base for the FY 2022 federal allotment for Puerto Rico based on the FY 2020 allotments, but President Biden recently stated that Puerto Rico will receive $2.9 billion in Medicaid funding. CMS noted the calculations related to the allotments would not affect the FMAP rates that would return to the statutory 55% (with an additional 6.2 percentage points available under the public health emergency) on October 1, 2021. However, a prior continuing resolution maintained FMAP rates of 76% for Puerto Rico and 83% for the rest of the U.S. territories through December 3, 2021. The most recent continuing resolution passed by the House would extend these FMAP rates for all territories (except Puerto Rico) through March 11, 2022. Puerto Rico’s current FMAP rate is 55%.

The Build Back Better Act (BBBA) proposed permanent increases in federal allotments and matching rates for the U.S. territories. The BBBA that passed the House and the draft released by the Senate Finance Committee both include provisions to increase the capped federal allotment and fixed matching rates for the U.S. territories (Figure 1). Compared to their FY 2021 allotments these proposed allotments represent modest increases of 5 – 8% for American Samoa, USVI, and Guam and more significant increases of 17% and 20% for CNMI and Puerto Rico, respectively. Additionally, FMAP rates would increase to 83% for all territories except Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico would receive an FMAP rate of 76% in FY 2022 and a rate of 83% in subsequent years dependent on Puerto Rico establishing a reimbursement floor for provider payments.

Federal Allotment and FMAP Rates for FY 2021 and 2022 for the U.S. Territories

The passage of the BBBA would provide Puerto Rico and the territories with more certainty in their federal funding and FMAP rates. The BBBA provides a permanent increase in the federal allotments and match rates for all territories. Without the BBBA, the FY 2022 allotment for Puerto Rico will remain slightly lower relative to FY 2021. In addition, the continuing resolution that would extend the enhanced match rate for the territories (except Puerto Rico) will expire on March 11, 2022. When this happens, all territories would see lower FMAP rates resulting in the territories needing to contribute more local funds to draw down federal funds.