Friday, December 30, 2011
Discretionary Funding in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)
C. Stephen Redhead, Coordinator
Specialist in Health Policy
Kirsten J. Colello
Specialist in Health and Aging Policy
Elayne J. Heisler
Analyst in Health Services
Sarah A. Lister
Specialist in Public Health and Epidemiology
Amanda K. Sarata
Specialist in Health Policy
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) reauthorized new funding for numerous existing discretionary grant and other programs and activities. ACA also created multiple new discretionary grant programs and activities and provided for each an authorization of appropriations. Funding for all of these programs and activities is subject to action by congressional appropriators. This report summarizes all the discretionary spending provisions in ACA that authorized appropriations for grant programs and other activities. A companion product, CRS Report R41301, Appropriations and Fund Transfers in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), summarizes all the mandatory appropriations and Medicare trust fund transfers in the new law.
Among the provisions that are intended to strengthen the nation’s health care safety net and improve access to care, ACA permanently reauthorized the federal health centers program and the National Health Service Corps (NHSC). The NHSC provides scholarships and student loan repayments to individuals who agree to a period of service as a primary care provider in a federally designated Health Professional Shortage Area. In addition, the new law addressed concerns about the current size, specialty mix, and geographic distribution of the health care workforce. It reauthorized and expanded existing health workforce education and training programs under Titles VII and VIII of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA). Title VII supports the education and training of physicians, dentists, physician assistants, and public health workers through grants, scholarships, and loan repayment. ACA created several new programs to increase training experiences in primary care, in rural areas, and in community-based settings, and provided training opportunities to increase the supply of pediatric subspecialists and geriatricians. It also expanded the nursing workforce development programs authorized under PHSA Title VIII to bolster undergraduate and graduate nursing education and training.
As part of a comprehensive framework for federal community-based (i.e., public health) prevention activities, including a national strategy and a national education and outreach campaign, ACA authorized several new grant programs with a focus on preventable or modifiable risk factors for disease (e.g., sedentary lifestyle, tobacco use). The new law also leveraged a number of mechanisms to improve the quality of health care, including new requirements for quality measure development, collection, analysis, and public reporting; programs to develop and disseminate innovative strategies for improving the quality of health care delivery; and support for care coordination programs such as medical homes, patient navigators, and the co-location of primary health care and mental health services.
Additionally, ACA authorized funding for programs to prevent elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation; grants to expand trauma care services and improve regional coordination of emergency services; and demonstration projects to implement alternatives to current tort litigation for resolving medical malpractice claims, among other provisions.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that ACA’s discretionary spending provisions, if fully funded by future appropriations acts, would result in appropriations of approximately $106 billion over the 10-year period FY2010-FY2019. Most of that funding would be for programs that existed prior to, and whose funding was reauthorized by, ACA. Few new programs created by ACA received funding in FY2010 or FY2011.
Date of Report: December 16, 2011
Number of Pages: 37
Order Number: R41390
Price: $29.95
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Public Health and Emergency Preparedness: CRS Experts
Sarah A. Lister
Specialist in Public Health and Epidemiology
The following table provides access to names and contact information for CRS experts on policy concerns relating to public health and emergency preparedness. Policy areas identified include
- public health and medical system preparedness and response;
- legal issues in preparedness and response;
- medical countermeasures;
- homeland security research and development; and
- health effects of threat agents.
Number of Pages: 4
Order Number: R40904
Price: $19.95
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Title X (Public Health Service Act) Family Planning Program
Angela Napili
Information Research Specialist
The federal government provides grants for voluntary family planning services through the Family Planning Program, Title X of the Public Health Service Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. Section 300 to Section 300a-6. The program, enacted in 1970, is the only domestic federal program devoted solely to family planning and related preventive health services. Title X is administered through the Office of Population Affairs (OPA) under the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health in the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).
Although the authorization of appropriations for Title X ended with FY1985, funding for the program has continued to be provided through appropriations bills for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies (Labor-HHS-Education). Within DHHS, Title X receives its funding through the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) account.
P.L. 112-10, the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, provided $299.400 million for Title X in FY2011. The conference report for H.R. 2055, the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012, would provide $296.838 million for Title X in FY2012. H.R. 2055 would continue previous years’ requirements that Title X funds not be spent on abortions, that all pregnancy counseling be nondirective, and that funds not be spent on promoting or opposing any legislative proposal or candidate for public office. Grantees would continue to be required to certify that they encourage “family participation” when minors seek family planning services, and certify that they counsel minors on how to resist attempted coercion into sexual activity. The bill also clarifies that family planning providers are not exempt from state notification and reporting laws on child abuse, child molestation, sexual abuse, rape, or incest.
The law (42 U.S.C. §300a-6) prohibits the use of Title X funds in programs where abortion is a method of family planning. According to OPA, family planning projects that receive Title X funds are closely monitored to ensure that federal funds are used appropriately and that funds are not used for prohibited activities such as abortion. The prohibition on abortion does not apply to all the activities of a Title X grantee, but only to activities that are part of the Title X project. A grantee’s abortion activities must be “separate and distinct” from the Title X project activities.
Several bills addressing Title X have been introduced in the 112thCongress. H.R. 217 and S. 96 would prohibit Title X grants to abortion-performing entities. H.R. 408 and S. 178 would eliminate the Title X program. H.R. 1099 would prohibit federal spending on any family planning activity. H.R. 1135, H.R. 1167, and S. 1904 would require an overall spending limit on meanstested welfare programs, defined to include family planning. S. 814 would require online disclosure of audits conducted under Title X on any entity receiving Title X funds. H.R. 1 would have eliminated funding for Title X for FY2011. H.R. 1 and H.Con.Res. 36 would have restricted federal funding to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates for FY2011. The House-introduced FY2012 Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill, H.R. 3070, would prohibit the bill’s funds from being used for Title X. H.R. 3070 would also restrict the bill’s funding to Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates unless they certify that the organization will not perform abortions.
Date of Report: December 16, 2011
Number of Pages: 25
Order Number: RL33644
Price: $29.95
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Definition of Income in PPACA for Certain Medicaid Provisions and Premium Credits
Janemarie Mulvey, Coordinator
Specialist in Health Care Financing
Evelyne P. Baumrucker
Analyst in Health Care Financing
Bernadette Fernandez
Specialist in Health Care Financing
Christine Scott
Specialist in Social Policy
Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA; P.L. 111-148, as amended), the definition of income for eligibility for certain Medicaid populations and premium credits in the exchanges is based on modified adjusted gross income (MAGI). The initial intent of using MAGI was to standardize the definition of income for Medicaid eligibility purposes to reduce some of the variability and complexity that exists under the current program and to provide consistency between Medicaid and the health insurance exchange. The use of MAGI, however, has raised some concerns among Congress and the Obama Administration, as it excludes some types of income either partially or altogether. Of particular interest has been the potential impact of eligibility for Medicaid and premium credits for early retirees (aged 62 through 64) receiving Social Security benefits, as some or all of their Social Security income may be excluded from the MAGI definition of income. By excluding some types of income, individuals and families with a higher percentage of total income relative to the federal poverty level may qualify for Medicaid and premium credits. A recent cost estimate by the Congressional Budget Office finds that changing the MAGI income calculation to include all Social Security benefits would reduce the deficit by $13 billion over the 2012-2021 period.
On November 21, 2011, President Obama signed into law P.L. 112-56, which will change the definition of income for these programs and include non-taxable Social Security in the definition of MAGI. The new law, however, does not address other forms of non-taxable income that are not currently in the MAGI definition. In evaluating the definition of MAGI, a number of issues might be considered. First, an alternative definition may add complexity compared with the use of MAGI. Specifically, because adjusted gross income (on which MAGI is based) can be computed largely from information on an individual’s federal tax return, verification of income is streamlined. If an alternative definition is used that is not based on tax return information, the administrative complexity of verifying nontaxable income from different sources comes into play. Second, the definition was developed to ensure coordination between Medicaid and premium credits in the health insurance exchange. A change in the definition of income for Medicaid should then also apply to premium credits to ensure consistency between Medicaid and the premium credit offered to selected individuals who purchase private health insurance through the exchanges. Finally, the recent enactment of P.L. 112-56 focused largely on the inclusion of Social Security benefits in income definitions for eligibility purposes. However, most other low-income programs include other types of income (e.g., nontaxable pensions) and asset holdings that are also excluded from MAGI.
Date of Report: December 6, 2011
Number of Pages: 24
Order Number: R41997
Price: $29.95
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Specialist in Health Care Financing
Evelyne P. Baumrucker
Analyst in Health Care Financing
Bernadette Fernandez
Specialist in Health Care Financing
Christine Scott
Specialist in Social Policy
Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA; P.L. 111-148, as amended), the definition of income for eligibility for certain Medicaid populations and premium credits in the exchanges is based on modified adjusted gross income (MAGI). The initial intent of using MAGI was to standardize the definition of income for Medicaid eligibility purposes to reduce some of the variability and complexity that exists under the current program and to provide consistency between Medicaid and the health insurance exchange. The use of MAGI, however, has raised some concerns among Congress and the Obama Administration, as it excludes some types of income either partially or altogether. Of particular interest has been the potential impact of eligibility for Medicaid and premium credits for early retirees (aged 62 through 64) receiving Social Security benefits, as some or all of their Social Security income may be excluded from the MAGI definition of income. By excluding some types of income, individuals and families with a higher percentage of total income relative to the federal poverty level may qualify for Medicaid and premium credits. A recent cost estimate by the Congressional Budget Office finds that changing the MAGI income calculation to include all Social Security benefits would reduce the deficit by $13 billion over the 2012-2021 period.
On November 21, 2011, President Obama signed into law P.L. 112-56, which will change the definition of income for these programs and include non-taxable Social Security in the definition of MAGI. The new law, however, does not address other forms of non-taxable income that are not currently in the MAGI definition. In evaluating the definition of MAGI, a number of issues might be considered. First, an alternative definition may add complexity compared with the use of MAGI. Specifically, because adjusted gross income (on which MAGI is based) can be computed largely from information on an individual’s federal tax return, verification of income is streamlined. If an alternative definition is used that is not based on tax return information, the administrative complexity of verifying nontaxable income from different sources comes into play. Second, the definition was developed to ensure coordination between Medicaid and premium credits in the health insurance exchange. A change in the definition of income for Medicaid should then also apply to premium credits to ensure consistency between Medicaid and the premium credit offered to selected individuals who purchase private health insurance through the exchanges. Finally, the recent enactment of P.L. 112-56 focused largely on the inclusion of Social Security benefits in income definitions for eligibility purposes. However, most other low-income programs include other types of income (e.g., nontaxable pensions) and asset holdings that are also excluded from MAGI.
Date of Report: December 6, 2011
Number of Pages: 24
Order Number: R41997
Price: $29.95
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Discretionary Funding in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)
C. Stephen Redhead, Coordinator
Specialist in Health Policy
Kirsten J. Colello
Specialist in Health and Aging Policy
Elayne J. Heisler
Analyst in Health Services
Sarah A. Lister
Specialist in Public Health and Epidemiology
Amanda K. Sarata
Specialist in Health Policy
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) reauthorized new funding for numerous existing discretionary grant and other programs and activities. ACA also created multiple new discretionary grant programs and activities and provided for each an authorization of appropriations. Funding for all of these programs and activities is subject to action by congressional appropriators. This report summarizes all the discretionary spending provisions in ACA that authorized appropriations for grant programs and other activities. A companion product, CRS Report R41301, Appropriations and Fund Transfers in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), summarizes all the mandatory appropriations and Medicare trust fund transfers in the new law.
Among the provisions that are intended to strengthen the nation’s health care safety net and improve access to care, ACA permanently reauthorized the federal health centers program and the National Health Service Corps (NHSC). The NHSC provides scholarships and student loan repayments to individuals who agree to a period of service as a primary care provider in a federally designated Health Professional Shortage Area. In addition, the new law addressed concerns about the current size, specialty mix, and geographic distribution of the health care workforce. It reauthorized and expanded existing health workforce education and training programs under Titles VII and VIII of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA). Title VII supports the education and training of physicians, dentists, physician assistants, and public health workers through grants, scholarships, and loan repayment. ACA created several new programs to increase training experiences in primary care, in rural areas, and in community-based settings, and provided training opportunities to increase the supply of pediatric subspecialists and geriatricians. It also expanded the nursing workforce development programs authorized under PHSA Title VIII to bolster undergraduate and graduate nursing education and training.
As part of a comprehensive framework for federal community-based (i.e., public health) prevention activities, including a national strategy and a national education and outreach campaign, ACA authorized several new grant programs with a focus on preventable or modifiable risk factors for disease (e.g., sedentary lifestyle, tobacco use). The new law also leveraged a number of mechanisms to improve the quality of health care, including new requirements for quality measure development, collection, analysis, and public reporting; programs to develop and disseminate innovative strategies for improving the quality of health care delivery; and support for care coordination programs such as medical homes, patient navigators, and the co-location of primary health care and mental health services.
Additionally, ACA authorized funding for programs to prevent elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation; grants to expand trauma care services and improve regional coordination of emergency services; and demonstration projects to implement alternatives to current tort litigation for resolving medical malpractice claims, among other provisions.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that ACA’s discretionary spending provisions, if fully funded by future appropriations acts, would result in appropriations of approximately $106 billion over the 10-year period FY2010-FY2019. Most of that funding would be for programs that existed prior to, and whose funding was reauthorized by, ACA. Few new programs created by ACA received funding in FY2010 or FY2011.
Date of Report: November 29, 2011
Number of Pages: 37
Order Number: R41390
Price: $29.95
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
