Illinois Dodges Disaster on Supreme Court's Obamacare Ruling

The following originally appeared on Crain's Chicago Business.

Illinois just dodged a bullet with the outcome of King v. Burwell. If the Supreme Court had ruled against subsidies being challenged in the case, working people and families in the state collectively would have lost more than $49 million a month to help purchase health insurance.

In its decision, the court affirmed the legality of the provision of premium tax credits under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in all states, whether they established their own health insurance marketplace or used the federal marketplace. On average, working poor and middle-class Illinoisans are getting $211 monthly to help pay their health insurance premiums. A different decision would have meant a 169 percent increase in out-of-pocket expense on the average premium.

Recent data by the Kaiser Family Foundation show nearly 73 percent of the remaining uninsured in Illinois eligible for Get Covered Illinois, the state's health insurance marketplace—roughly 597,473 people—live and work in metropolitan Chicago. In the Chicago area, more than 100,000 of the remaining uninsured reside in areas where English is not the predominant spoken language. While concise data are not available of how many of the uninsured are working, American Community Survey data indicate that as many as 62 percent of the uninsured in Illinois are working at least part time and more than likely work for small businesses.

The most recent year for which U.S. Census data on businesses are available, 2012, show 314,199 business establishments in Illinois. However, 94 percent of these companies employ fewer than 50 employees and thus are not required to provide health insurance via the ACA. Cook County alone accounts for 41 percent of the state's total small businesses.

NOW WHAT?

Now that the King v. Burwell decision has put the legality of subsidies to rest, Illinois needs to get busy enrolling the remaining 597,473 uninsured individuals eligible for a path to coverage in the Get Covered Illinois marketplace. Of these uninsured, 283,629 are eligible for a tax credit or subsidy.

It's a matter of economic security for our residents and for Illinois' economic environment. The math tells us that the business community—especially small businesses—needs to be at the heart of efforts to enroll the remaining uninsured. Crain's and Health & Disability Advocates surveyed small businesses last fall and learned that Chicago-area companies still face increasing health care costs; are confused by the requirements of the ACA; and are unlikely to enroll themselves and their employees online. In fact, more than 80 percent of those surveyed said they shop for health insurance for themselves and their employees using health insurance brokers and agents.

Now that federal funding for ACA assisters and navigators is ending, a public-private partnership for enrollment in Get Covered Illinois is critical. We need to double down on engaging health insurance brokers and agents. While the state did an amazing job in enrolling 633,757 adults in Medicaid as part of ACA, Illinois ranked well behind others in marketplace enrollment, coming in 20th out of 37 states that operate marketplaces using HealthCare.gov.

Get Covered Illinois is key to helping Illinois businesses thrive, enabling them to better attract and retain talent. The marketplace also encourages entrepreneurship by ending the reliance of individuals on larger employer-sponsored coverage.

A strong ACA marketplace is a win-win for the business community and the state. We urge Springfield, City Hall and county governments to make enrollment of the remaining uninsured a top priority and engage the business community, health insurance brokers and agents in the process.

Barbara Otto                                          
CEO                                                        
Health & Disability Advocates           

Erica Salem
Director of Strategic Health Initiatives
Health & Disability Advocates

What Really Happens After Enrolling in Medicaid Managed Care?

Health & Disability Advocates (HDA) is monitoring the rollout of the Medicare-Medicaid Alignment Initiative (MMAI) and has heard from frustrated case managers working with consumers who are confused about the enrollment process and their rights. In response, HDA developed an enrollment timeline that explains what new enrollees can expect from Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) and plan representatives upon enrollment. To produce the timeline, HDA researched the MMAI demonstration contract developed by the State of Illinois and approved by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)  HDA also solicited input from health plans on whether their on-the-ground practices were accurately reflected in the timeline.

The finished product outlines important points for case managers and their clients to consider.

One Day Changes Everything

Consumers who are enrolled in a managed care plan after the 12th day of the month will not see their coverage start until the month after next. This is relevant for consumers choosing a specific managed care plan in order to see a particular provider or specialist in that plan’s network. Submitting paperwork after the cut-off date means consumers would have to wait longer than expected for necessary treatment. Helping consumers submit required documents in a timely manner can guarantee they are connected to the medical treatment they need, which promotes continuity of care.

Stratification Sets Up Future Contact Standards

Once enrolled in a plan, all enrollees can expect to complete a Health Risk Screening within 60 days. The screen collects information on the enrollee’s physical and mental health conditions and identifies their current medical providers. This is what IlliniCare’s Health Screen looks like. Health plans use the screen to establish intensity of services and frequency of contact with Care Coordinators by stratifying the enrollee as low, moderate or high risk.

Enrollees stratified as low risk will receive annual follow-ups from their Care Coordinators while those stratified as moderate or high risk will have quarterly follow-ups. Moderate and high risk enrollees will also complete a Health Risk Assessment and create an Individualized Care Plan within 90 days. These enrollees will help form their own Interdisciplinary Care Team of healthcare providers that meets quarterly to review the Individualized Care Plan.

The Care Coordinators’ Role

Care Coordinators focus on enrollees’ healthcare needs by connecting them to necessary tests, doctors and treatment. They also facilitate information sharing among providers by leading the Interdisciplinary Care Team. Addressing enrollees’ medical needs is their priority. Care Coordinators direct less attention to linking enrollees to social supports, like housing and public benefits.

It’s also important for case managers to know that Care Coordinators must manage a substantial caseload of up to 600 enrollees. Caseloads include a blend of low, moderate and high risk enrollees, with each risk level weighted differently.

Understanding what a care coordinator can—and cannot—be expected to do is advantageous to case managers. When roles are clearly recognized, case managers know how care coordinators can be used as a resource. And in what instances an alternative referral would be more appropriate. This establishes a stronger professional relationship between case managers and care coordinators, which ultimately benefits the enrollee.

Case managers and Care Coordinators are on the front lines of healthcare reform and fostering solid working relationships between these two players will be a critical component of the success or failure of these efforts. Knowing what case managers and their clients can expect from managed care plans can lay the foundation for a strong relationship that supports the health of individuals while also furthering the goals of healthcare reform.

Bryce Marable MSW
Health Policy Analyst
Health & Disability Advocates

People With Disabilities Who Opt Out of ‘Voluntary’ Wellness Programs Will Pay the Price, and the EEOC’s Okay With That.

The following originally appeared on the American Civil Liberties Union's Speak Freely Blog.

Voluntary wellness programs at work can provide benefits to employees, but employers are increasingly adopting “voluntary” wellness programs that unfairly burden workers with disabilities the most of all. Worse, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission seems to think that’s okay, undermining core antidiscrimination protections it used to defend.

Here’s why.

Imagine a woman living with rheumatoid arthritis and severe depression who, under doctor’s care, has finally returned to work. Her medications — a corticosteroid and an antidepressant — have triggered weight gain. Now imagine this woman facing her employer’s “wellness activities:” She is instructed to fill out a detailed questionnaire about her medical conditions; she is weighed and pronounced overweight; she is told to lose weight. Oh, and the program is voluntary — but if she doesn’t comply, she will have to pay hundreds of dollars more in annual health care premiums. 

This imaginary example is all too real: Persons with disabilities risk discrimination and stigma if their employers gain access to their private medical information. And disabled workers are far more likely to have a condition targeted by wellness programs, such as high blood pressure, high blood glucose, or being overweight. 

Historically, the Americans with Disabilities Act has provided employees with disabilities some protections against overly intrusive and punitive wellness programs. The EEOC has maintained, sensibly, that voluntary medical examinations and inquiries cannot impose penalties on employees who decline to participate. 

Until now.

The EEOC has recently proposed new regulations and guidance language on wellness programs that would allow employers to implement wellness programs that add up to 30 percent of the cost of the employee’s health insurance to an employee’s health care bill. Based on the average annual premium, this translates to an extra cost for disabled employees of about $1,800 per year, either because they don’t want to answer questions that could expose their disability to their employer or because they cannot meet the health goal

The EEOC describes these programs as “voluntary,” but workers with disabilities are the least likely to be able to afford additional health care premiums. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, median household income for people with disabilities is less than half of household income for people without disabilities: $25,974 compared to $61,103. At the same time, there is little evidence that these programs are effective. 

If the EEOC is going to allow employers to charge workers hundreds more each year, it needs to be sure important privacy and disability protections are in place.

Three safeguards matter the most. First, the EEOC needs to provide guidance language that workers with disabilities have the right to request a reasonable accommodation waiver from a wellness program, so that their medical status can be taken into account in their ability to comply. The guidelines should also protect disabled workers’ privacy, so that their decision to join or not join the wellness program doesn’t broadcast the details of — or even the existence of — their medical condition to their employer. Finally, disabled workers should rest assured that the guidelines protect them from disability-based discrimination in the workplace, such as harassment of employees who cannot comply with “normal” health standards. 

Comments on the proposed regulations are due this Friday, June 19, 2015. Tell the EEOC not to permit employers to subject their disabled workers to a Hobson’s choice: Submit to the prescribed wellness activities, or pay hundreds more each year. The EEOC should instead insure that workers with disabilities can opt out of these programs without penalty. 

Claudia Center

Senior Staff Attorney

American Civil Liberties Union

Redoing Redes: Strengthening Communication Procedures in the Illinois Medicaid Redetermination Project

The Illinois Medicaid Redetermination Project (IMRP) is erroneously suspending vital medical care for people who remain eligible. Since the rollout of the IMRP in early 2013, the program has been plagued by inadequate communication from the state that leaves consumers confused and ultimately without healthcare. Consumers report that they are not receiving the required notices by mail and when they call with questions, frontline state staff cannot provide answers. Because of the state’s ineffective communication protocols and inadequate employee training, rightful Medicaid beneficiaries are in the precarious situation of being unable to fill their prescriptions, go to the doctor or receive treatment. The purpose of the IMRP is to save state dollars by trimming the Medicaid program of those who are no longer eligible, not cut people who still deserve services.

Letters Lost in the Mail

Medicaid beneficiaries are cut simply because they never received their redetermination notices in the mail. For example, Health & Disability Advocates worked with a mother whose child had been dropped from Medicaid because IMRP sent the notice to a non-existent address. The fact that IRMP sent the letter to an incorrect address on the same street where the family lived suggests that it was a clerical error. In this situation, a young adult dealing with serious mental illness could not access medication and treatment, because the state, not the individual made an error. Sudden lapses in care can pose serious consequences for people who rely on these supports for their physical and mental health.

This is not an isolated instance. A survey of case managers working with older adults and people with disabilities found that the IMRP fails to adequately notify people of their redetermination responsibilities and inform them when they are bounced from the program. Many get the bad news when they attempt to fill prescription or go to the doctor and are told that they are no longer covered. People deserve clear communication from the state telling them they are no longer covered and the steps to get reinstated.

Confused and Not Covered

Even in cases where Medicaid recipients do receive notices, many consumers find the letters are hard to understand and filled with jargon. Given that the intended audience has never before been required to submit to annual redeterminations and may also have lower literacy levels, the letters must be crystal clear. Reports from case managers suggest the letters are confusing.  One case manager surveyed noted “clients do not understand what documents they need to submit with the form and whether they need to submit anything.” With the potential for people to lose their health coverage, the consequences of this confusion are severe.

IMRP’s own data reveal their communication shortcomings. According to May’s Medicaid redetermination numbers, 81% of cancellations are due to a lack of response. Being cancelled doesn’t mean a person is ineligible. In fact, a substantial portion of these clients should still be receiving services.  Of those dropped, 1/3 were reinstated within three months.  In FY 2015 alone, this translates into 238,025 people being incorrectly cut from Medicaid, and this number could be even higher. People who are less frequent healthcare users may learn of their cancellation when they attempt to schedule a doctor’s appointment. With people who deserve Medicaid cut from the program, the IMRP is not achieving its main objective of reducing state expenditures by eliminating those who no longer qualify. Cutting eligible people will actually result in higher costs. Without access to primary medical treatment, people will resort to more costly emergency room care for conditions that could have been managed or even prevented.

Matters get worse when consumers call state workers for clarification, because frontline staff members are often not fully informed themselves. In the above-mentioned case of the mother fighting for her son’s coverage to be reinstated, her interaction with the IMRP hotline was unhelpful and hurtful. The representative said there was nothing more she could do and blamed the family. Stateline workers should be fully trained to provide answers; anything less only increases confusion and frustration.

The Path Forward

The state must develop plain-language notices that explain redeterminations and their importance while outlining the specific steps to keeping coverage. This would not be a new undertaking. State officials have previously brainstormed ways to create simple, more consumer friendly forms. Unfortunately, the furor around budget deficits and service cut threats has drowned out the push for clear communication standards. Even worse, continuing to deemphasize this issue will leave many rightful Medicaid recipients suddenly without coverage. Communication protocols and state staff should support individuals in maintaining their vital connection to healthcare, not create hurdles that effectively jeopardize emotional and physical health. State officials must restart the discussions on clear notices and broaden the conversation to include improved training for frontline staff. These reforms will go a long way towards supporting the IMRP’s original objective of eliminating wasteful spending while also keeping those who still deserve coverage connected to care.

Bryce Marable MSW

Health Policy Analyst

Health & Disability Advocates

The Missing Link: Putting Health into Your Hands

The Affordable Care Act brought about the expansion of Erie Family Health Center, the only health clinic in Evanston and Skokie. Long after its opening in Evanston, Erie Family Health Center was under capacity and wanted to reach more people. In contrast, the Evanston and Skokie Health Departments conducted community surveys in 2013 and found that one of the most prevalent health issues identified by the community was access to healthcare.

Something needed to change in the way that people accessed the healthcare system and the way they were connected to information and care. Inequalities in the healthcare system limit the types of care and information for people of different backgrounds. Many people do not know how to access quality health information or where to go for their health-related needs.

A Community Collaboration Promoting Health

Students at Northwestern University are partnering with public institutions, community organizations and university departments to create student-run health resource centers at the Evanston and Skokie libraries. Called the Health Information Resource Centers Utilizing Libraries in Evanston and Skokie (HIRCULES) Health Hub, the initiative will work to promote health literacy, preventative care, awareness of community resources and understanding of the existing healthcare system. The program is powerful and unique; it empowers people to take ownership through guidance, linkage and education.

The HIRCULES Health Hub will provide the Evanston and Skokie community with a trusted central resource where they can be connected to educational materials to improve health literacy. The HIRCULES Health Hub desks will be staffed by Northwestern students trained as medical librarians at Evanston and Skokie Public Libraries. Students will gather resources and search for materials for library patrons. HIRCULES will also include a website with relevant health resources and databases that contain searchable information including frequently asked questions, health services available in Evanston and Skokie and a calendar of health-related community events.

Identifying Challenges, Creating Solutions

The HIRCULES Health Hub will feature monthly themes with digestible and accessible information. Developing these monthly themes has taught staff a great deal about the community and led to new solutions. For example, last summer staff created a Back to School theme and wanted to inform parents where they could obtain school supplies if they could not afford to buy them from a store. The organization that had previously provided this service had recently closed, and with two months until the start of the new school year, no one else was planning to provide supplies to any Evanston school districts. HIRCULES staff reached out to community organizations, Parent Teacher Associations and school district boards to find a point person who ran a program to fill the need for school supplies for low-income students. Because of HIRCULES, real needs of the community were identified and addressed.

Improving Knowledge and Health

Normalizing routine, preventative care is another important aspect of the project. HIRCULES staff will promote preventative care through education of how to utilize Federally Qualified Health Centers and medical homes. Most people are not aware of the implications of the Affordable Care Act, which promotes preventative care. This reduces costs and improves health outcomes over time. Emphasis on preventative care education is imperative in empowering people to utilize pre-acute and ambulatory points of access to health systems. The partnership between HIRCULES and Erie Family Health Center helps establish a healthy lifestyle through regular, preventative primary care checkups and referrals for more complex health services.

Information Hub for the Community

The final objective of HIRCULES is to guide people to health-related resources, simplifying their search for health and wellness and improving services in the existing, complex healthcare system. All available, health-related resources in the community are being compiled into a virtual database accessible online and through visiting the HIRCULES Health Hub. For example, if an expecting mother wants to know where she can access prenatal and postnatal care, HIRCULES staff can direct them to Family Focus. If a parent needs assistance enrolling his or her family in health insurance, they will be connected with a local health insurance navigator and resources from Get Covered Illinois.

These major health issues will take time to address and overcome. Programs like HIRCULES are a vital contribution to making positive changes and improving the health of Evanston and Skokie citizens.

Brittany Zelch & Emery Weinstein

Brittany and Emery are undergraduate students attending Northwestern University Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences who study global health. They helped found and remain involved in the HIRCULES Health Hub.

ACA, Medicaid and Unintended Consequences for People with Disabilities

People with disabilities who are eligible for healthcare through Medicaid may experience painful gaps in coverage during transitions. There are groups of people with disabilities that are particularly vulnerable: those who need long-term care services, those who apply but are not yet found eligible for SSI in 209b states with expanded Medicaid and youth transitioning to the adult system.

Long-term care services and supports, such as personal assistance services or durable medical equipment, are critically important to some people with disabilities. Medicaid packages for people with blindness and disabilities, or AABD or SSI Related Medicaid, offer comprehensive coverage, including long-term care supports and services. For those who need them, these services are a lifeline to independence, living in the community and employment.  Either not affordable or available through the private insurance market, Medicaid has been the sole access point for people with disabilities who need long-term care services. The Adult ACA Medicaid group, or expansion group, is a Medicaid program that may or may not provide an individual with long-term care services in any given state.

209(b) Expansion States Facing Challenges with Transitions 

One key difference across states is the option to automatically provide SSI Related Medicaid to recipients of the federally-administered state supplementary payments though the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. Ten states use at least one eligibility criterion that is more restrictive than the SSI program for Medicaid eligibility and are referred to as 209(b) states. This means that an individual in these states who applies and is found eligible for SSI must make a separate application for Medicaid coverage.

The following states are currently 209(b) states: Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Virginia. All but Missouri, Oklahoma and Virginia have expanded Medicaid eligibility through the ACA.

Limited Access to Long-Term Care and Providers in the ACA Adult Group

Because many SSI applications take longer to process than Medicaid applications, people with disabilities can frequently be found eligible for ACA Adult Medicaid while waiting for SSI eligibility to be approved. While this group of individuals who have been approved as ACA Adult Medicaid eligible has access to healthcare, they may not have access to long-term care services.

Once SSI eligibility is approved, however, the beneficiary is no longer eligible for the category of Medicaid (ACA Adult) they are currently receiving. When they are put into the correct category for coverage (SSI Related Medicaid), they are sometimes dropped from one health plan and put into another without their knowledge. The end result is a current Medicaid beneficiary who is denied or faces delayed access to long-term care services he or she should be receiving under SSI Related Medicaid, as well as potentially losing access to providers and being forced to reapply altogether.

In addition to the lack of access to needed long-term care services, people may also experience challenges related to accessing medical service providers. In some states, the integration of the ACA and managed care has vastly changed provider infrastructure, with managed care plans for SSI Related Medicaid offering different provider networks and services than ACA Adult Medicaid managed care plans.

Many individuals, especially those new to SSI Related Medicaid, will not be aware that they are in a different category until another action is taken, such applying for a Medicaid waiver service, attempting to contact their managed care plan or going to see their providers. Both of these issues can result from the timing of an individual’s Medicaid application and approval.

Youth with Disabilities Facing Challenges with Transitions

Youth with disabilities can also potentially face significant unintended consequences around access to appropriate healthcare coverage. Children with disabilities are found eligible for SSI due to a reduction in both Activities of Daily Living and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living. This means a youth can be eligible for SSI under a broader context of criteria, like an inability to socialize or play with others.

Adult disability determinations, by contrast, are made based on a disabling condition that impacts employment—not only current employment, any employment in the country that may be available to someone with such impairments. These are vastly different criteria.

As a result, many children are found eligible and begin receiving childhood SSI and SSI Related Medicaid. However, when they turn 18, they are required to meet the adult disability guidelines in order to remain eligible. Many children fail to meet those adult requirements and their benefits are terminated. Of those that are found ineligible when they turn 18, a number are later found to be eligible in further review or appeal processes. Because Medicaid waiver programs are available only to individuals who are current Medicaid recipients, a child may have waited years to be eligible for Medicaid waivers, be found eligible, only later to be denied eligibility for adult disability—which results in losing benefits under SSI Related Medicaid and SSI eligibility. If, upon later application, the individual is once again found eligible for both adult SSI and SSI Related Medicaid, he or she must now go to the back of the waiting list for the same waiver services previously lost under a youth determination. This can result in years without necessary, critical services and care.

Experiences in the States

Health & Disability Advocates conducted a short, informal survey of seven 209(b) states that have expanded Medicaid to learn more about how states identify people who are in the “wrong” eligibility category and the processes states have in place to prevent this from happening. With six of the seven states responding to the survey, HDA found that:

• Three of six respondents offer Medicaid provider packages that are different depending on whether you are in SSI Related Medicaid or ACA Related Medicaid.

• Three of the six responding states offer some variety of waivers to individuals even if they are placed in ACA Related Medicaid.

• None of the responding states have a formal process for coordinating information about individuals who transition eligibility from one service package to another.

• Four of six states are unaware of whether individuals have been improperly placed in the wrong Medicaid eligibility package; the remaining 33% have implemented trainings, but know that individuals continue to get placed into the wrong eligibility group.

• Five states (all but North Dakota) were not aware of specific alerts that notify the Medicaid beneficiary that their eligibility for one program has ended and another started.

Upon further contact, roughly half of the states were in the early stages of identifying the issue of individuals being inappropriately placed and noted a need to develop a process for re-engaging the beneficiary to get them connected to appropriate providers for maximized health.

Recommendations Going Forward

While states are currently uncertain about the scope and breadth of these issues, it is important to identify individuals who have fallen through the cracks and may experience a significant disruption in services and eligibility. At a minimum, requiring states to create an automated notification system for changes to eligibility would provide beneficiaries greater clarity and time to plan.  In North Dakota, for example, individuals receive a notice as they leave eligibility under one Medicaid group and become eligible for another. Notice of and clear information about the ramifications of the change is critical.

Another recommendation for states is to look at integration of its systems and data tracking of disability populations. Data exchanges between the state and federal systems, along with the differing eligibility criteria among various programs, should make tracking persons with disabilities a high priority for states. Minnesota, for example, is developing a new integrated system with the capacity to match data sets to a broader context of information, such as employment status. This will greatly enhance the ability of the state to make sure that people with serious health needs receive the proper services and have access to the supports they need for the greatest possible independence.

Joe Entwisle, MS, CLCP
Sr. Policy Analyst
Health & Disability Advocates

The Future of Enrollment in Illinois: Where We’ve Been and Where We’re Going

When Get Covered America came to Illinois before the first open enrollment period for the Affordable Care Act in 2013, there was a lot of work to be done. At that time 78% of the uninsured had not heard of the health insurance marketplace and were unaware of the new health coverage options or opportunities for financial help available to them for the first time. The initial awareness gap was daunting, but hundreds of thousands of Illinoisans stood to benefit from the marketplace and needed to know how the Affordable Care Act could help them.

Many Milestones Through Collaboration

Fortunately, there were a number of stakeholders like Health & Disability Advocates (HDA), the Campaign for Better Health Care (CBHC), Alivio Medical Center and the AIDS Foundation of Chicago, among others, eager and ready for the challenge ahead. This commitment helped achieve many of the goals laid out in the beginning. After two successful open enrollment periods, nearly 350,000 Illinoisans have enrolled in health insurance through the marketplace, and hundreds of thousands more have received coverage through expanded Medicaid and CHIP. Working together towards the same mission, Get Covered America and its partner organizations increased awareness and provided enrollment resources for consumers across the state.

Stepping Back to Move Forward

Because of the great work that has happened on the ground in Illinois, Get Covered America will be stepping back with full confidence in capable partners like HDA, CBHC and many others—such as Family Guidance Centers and Ada S. McKinley—to continue this important work to make health care enrollment a permanent part of communities. It’s clear that the coalition of partners who have come together on this issue have made great strides over the past two years. As the insurance landscape changes and the number of uninsured Illinoisans continues to decrease, Get Covered America wants to make sure that resources are allocated in the smartest and most effective way.

While Get Covered America won’t have an active outreach presence on-the-ground in Illinois moving forward, the organization will continue to support partners in the state with cutting edge data, best practices, tools and resources. Get Covered America will refine and continue to offer digital tools like the Get Covered Connector while also introducing new programs, like  training and support for local partners and health insurance literacy resources for the newly insured.

The Enrollment Challenge Ahead

Just released by Get Covered America, the State of Enrollment Report takes a critical look at the lessons  learned and what still needs to be done to get Illinois covered. Using on-the-ground knowledge and data analysis, the report identified several key initiatives integral to maximizing the number of Illinoisans who enroll in coverage. This is a great resource for partners on the ground and the foundation for a sustainable coalition for years to come.

The Get Covered America team is thrilled at what has been accomplished in Illinois so far, but there’s still important work to be done. While more Illinoisans have health coverage than ever before, there are still too many who remain uninsured and need the facts about how the Affordable Care Act can help them and their families.  On-the-ground partners like CBHC, Family Guidance Centers and Alivio Medical Center will continue this work and make health care enrollment an institutional reality for years to come.  And Get Covered America  looks forward to supporting their efforts.

David Elin
National Fundraising Director
Enroll America