';
Tags Posts tagged with "behavioral health"

behavioral health

The Republican-controlled U.S. House adopted a federal budget resolution last week that instructs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over Medicaid, to identify at least $800 billion in mandatory spending cuts during the next 10 years. The resolution is now in the GOP-controlled U.S. Senate.

Medicaid, which is jointly funded by states and the federal government through a federal matching program with no cap, is seen as a prime target for cuts, as it is one of the largest federal programs at a cost of more than $600 billion a year. Approximately 70 million people in the United States receive Medicaid benefits, with about 3 million — including 1.2 million children — of those in Pennsylvania. While officially the federal government did not name Medicaid as the target, there are virtually no other areas to turn to in order to generate such spending cuts.

Proposals being considered in Congress to cut Medicaid are estimated to cost Pennsylvania as much as $2 billion a year. These cuts will inevitably result in:

  • Fewer insured Pennsylvanians;
  • Fewer covered services for those who remain insured;
  • Lower reimbursement rates paid to providers;
  • Increases in uncompensated care; and
  • Higher healthcare costs for those who are insured.

In addition to broad, negative consequences, each segment of the human services sector will be affected.

Behavioral Health

Medicaid is the largest payer of behavioral healthcare services in the United States, where nearly 40 percent of non-elderly adult Medicaid beneficiaries have a mental health or substance use disorder. Additionally, Medicaid is an essential revenue source for behavioral healthcare organizations. With the potential of fewer covered individuals and lower reimbursement rates, access will be squeezed, with existing providers less incentivized to accept Medicaid patients.

These potential cuts come on the heels of a compromised post-public health emergency unwinding of Medicaid, in which Pennsylvania’s actuarial analysis for the behavioral health capitation was severely underestimated. The eventual Medicaid rolls included more individuals with acute and chronic conditions, resulting in higher levels of care and services. Despite mid-year adjustments to the HealthChoices’s primary contractors, Pennsylvania will start the new fiscal year with the need to increase its BH Medicaid capitation by nearly $640 million.

Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

Medicaid is the primary funding source for IDD services. If the proposed multi-billion dollar funding cuts occur, Pennsylvania’s intellectual disability system will face serious consequences, including service reductions, longer waitlists, and limited access to essential care. Providers already under strain may have to discharge individuals from community-based services, potentially returning them to institutional settings and undoing decades of progress towards independence and inclusion.

Pediatric Rehabilitation

Medicaid is a key funding source for healthcare and rehabilitation services for infants, children, and adolescents living with disabilities and medical complexity. Even for families with a private primary insurance, Medicaid as a secondary insurance fills in the gaps in covered care. Children with disabilities, regardless of household income, are Medicaid eligible to offset the high costs of care. Medicaid cuts will negatively impact the most vulnerable in our state: children with disabilities and special health needs.

Early Intervention

Medicaid is a supplemental funding source for Early Intervention services in Pennsylvania. All Pennsylvanian families currently enjoy access to these crucial home- and community-based services with no cost-share. Cuts in funding to this program may cause tighter eligibility requirements or cost-shares for families, ultimately decreasing access to essential services.


How the Cuts Might Be Done

Work Requirements

At this point, work requirements appear to be one of the most likely paths to Medicaid cuts.

According to the Pennsylvania Health Access Network (PHAN), approximately 1 million adults in Pennsylvania would be subject to the work requirement.

Medicaid work requirements would require certain Medicaid enrollees to work, look for work, or conduct another qualifying activity (e.g., education, caretaking) as a condition of receiving health insurance. As part of such a requirement, all working age Medicaid enrollees may be required on a monthly basis to report their work or verify their eligibility for an exemption because they are in school or a job training program, caring for others, or disabled/in treatment. Failure to do so would result in them losing Medicaid coverage.

On the surface, increasing support for work requirements is understandable. Able-bodied citizens on Medicaid who can work, should work. What is not being discussed is the fact that most of these individuals are already working but at an income that still qualifies them for Medicaid. Further, studies from states that have attempted to implement a Medicaid work requirement show that the cost to the state to implement and administer such a requirement is in the tens of millions of dollars.

If work requirements become a reality, advocates must lobby for waivers for special populations.

Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP)

At this point, according to Speaker of the U.S. House Mike Johnson, FMAP (as well as per-capita caps, see below) are not a consideration for reducing Medicaid spending.

Each state’s FMAP determines its federal share of Medicaid funding. FMAP is a formula that uses the state’s most recent three-year average per capita income data to provide higher matching rates to states with lower per capita incomes relative to the national average. FMAPs have a statutory minimum of 50 percent and a maximum of 83 percent.

In Pennsylvania, 56 percent of Medicaid costs are paid with federal dollars, leaving Pennsylvania to cover the balance.

Under the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid Expansion, the FMAP for what became the newly eligible population — mostly low wage workers who do not have coverage through an employer, disabled workers, caregivers to children or elderly family members, and students — is fixed at 90 percent federal funding, with the commonwealth paying for the balance.

Per Capita Caps

A per capita cap funding arrangement sets an upper limit on federal payments per Medicaid enrollee in each eligibility group. In an aggregated cap (also called a capped allotment) approach, states receive federal matching funds up to a determined maximum. If the cap is exceeded, the state bears 100 percent of that cost with no federal match.


Resources

There are many resources continually being developed and distributed. These include ways to take immediate action with Congress. The following are some of the most relevant to our membership.


Next Steps

RCPA will continue to closely monitor the issue. As Congress’s next steps become clearer, we will work with our partners, including you, to develop and execute strategies to stop Medicaid cuts or minimize the negative effects.

Contact your respective RCPA Policy Director with questions.

Date: April 2, 2025
Time: 10:00 am – 11:30 am
Register Here

It has been said that if you meet one person with autism, you’ve met ONE person with autism. This means that autism looks unique in each individual. It is also important to understand that autism frequently coexists with intellectual disabilities and/or mental health diagnoses.

In this training, PCHC will:

  • Increase the general knowledge about intellectual disabilities, autism spectrum disorder, and co-occurring mental health challenges;
  • Understand how mental health challenges may present in individuals with intellectual disabilities or autism spectrum disorders; and
  • Discuss common barriers and resources to treatment.

PCHC’s hope is that, with this information, you will be able to better understand and serve this complex group of wonderful people.

This Drexel University training will be held March 20, 2025, from 9:00 am – 3:30 pm, and will take place at the Holiday Inn Grantville. The training fee is $15 to attend and $45 for CEs/attendance. The course will be led by Chris Owens, MA, LPC, CCTP.

This course focuses on specific interventions of use to the professional helper when providing therapeutic services in behavioral healthcare. The aim of this workshop is to add to the helper’s “bag of tricks” or “toolkit” pertaining to assisting people with histories of trauma. Participants engage in didactic and experiential learning related to several specific interventions geared toward managing and moving beyond trauma. Participants also dialogue in small groups to share creative and effective interventions they have used in their various practice settings.

Learning Objectives:

By the end of this training, participants will be able to:

  • Summarize the general purposes of interventions;
  • Discuss having a sound rationale for using various techniques;
  • Describe the benefits associated with each strategy;
  • Outline the drawbacks and barriers to using selected interventions; and
  • Implement each intervention as relevant to one’s own professional practice.

CE Credits:

  • APA — 5
  • CPRP — 5
  • LSW/LCSW/LPC/LMFT — 5
  • NBCC — 5
  • PA Act48 — 5
  • PCB — 5
  • PSNA — 5
  • IACET —.5

Please visit here for additional information.

The Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) recently convened an International Standards Advisory Committee (ISAC) to develop new accreditation standards for an Integrated Primary Care specialty designation. A specialty designation requires a program seeking accreditation to meet an additional set of standards that reflects its expertise in a specific type of service delivery or for a specific population of persons served. Integrating primary care into a mental health or substance use disorder program allows the program to holistically address the behavioral health, physical health, and social needs of the persons served, enhance the level of care provided, and improve outcomes for the persons served. Through the efforts of the ISAC, the program standards for Health Home were also updated. The final standards will be published in CARF’s 2026 standards manuals for Behavioral Health, Child and Youth Services, and Opioid Treatment Programs.

CARF is seeking comments on each of the proposed descriptions and standards. The deadline to submit comments is Tuesday, February 25.

0 4251

By Jason Snyder, Director, SUD Treatment Services, BH Division

As I watched Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro give his budget address last Tuesday, it occurred to me that the light Pennsylvania government had brightly shined on the addiction epidemic for nearly the past 10 years has greatly dimmed.

In a speech of nearly 11,000 words, not one of them was “addiction.” Not one mention of treatment. No mention at all of an overdose death epidemic. Over the course of a 90-minute budget address, Gov. Shapiro, a man who likes to “get stuff done,” did not even attempt to take credit for overdose death numbers that are trending downward. He didn’t acknowledge them at all.

Granted, the Pennsylvania Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs (DDAP) continues to release pots of opioid settlement and federal money, including State Opioid Response (SOR) funding, into the behavioral health ecosystem, though not all of it is available to DDAP-licensed treatment providers. Counties also continue to spend opioid settlement dollars from multiple sources, including a national settlement with the three largest pharmaceutical distributors that netted more than $1 billion for Pennsylvania.

In arguing that everyone else is legalizing adult-use recreational marijuana, so Pennsylvania should, too, the governor ignores the evidence of the harms of marijuana, including a link between legalized adult recreational marijuana and an increase in adolescent suicides, as well as the broader implications for addiction treatment such that not one dime of the $536,000,000 in estimated Fiscal Year 2025/26 revenue is proposed to be directly allocated to DDAP. Although it appears recreational legalization is inevitable at some point, failing to acknowledge its potential to harm some Pennsylvanians is disingenuous.

Dig a little deeper into the budget, and it looks no brighter for addiction treatment providers.

Behavioral HealthChoices — the name for Pennsylvania’s Medicaid managed care program for behavioral health — currently is in a financial crisis. Pennsylvania counties and behavioral health managed care organizations (BH-MCO) are reporting to be significantly underfunded due to a Department of Human Services’ (DHS) actuarial error made in calculating the effects of the unwind of the Medicaid rolls post-Covid. The underfunding is affecting the counties’ abilities to meet contractual obligations to provide behavioral health services. In other words, the $6.3 billion comprised of state and federal dollars in the current fiscal year (2024/25) budget (see p. 104 of 372 of DHS’s budget book) for Behavioral HealthChoices capitation — capitation being a form of payment based on a complex formula that determines an amount of money needed per Medicaid recipient per month — is not enough money to pay for addiction and mental health treatment for everyone who wants and needs it.

Although we see an 18 percent increase in the HealthChoices capitation line item that amounts to $660 million in state dollars in the governor’s proposed executive budget, significant questions are still unanswered and even bigger concerns remain.

For example, we do not know how much of the 18 percent increase is earmarked for Behavioral HealthChoices, which is concerning because the Physical HealthChoices program also is underfunded, and the Physical HealthChoices program is a significantly higher expenditure. Estimates suggest that the Behavioral and Physical HealthChoices systems combined need an additional $2.5 billion (state and federal combined) in the current calendar year, which is partly funded by two separate fiscal year budgets, to meet their obligations to Pennsylvania’s most vulnerable. There is a $230,000,000 supplemental payment in the proposed budget, which would help to address the immediate need for additional funds in the current fiscal year, but we are hearing only a small percentage of this is for the HealthChoices issue.

As a result of the underfunding and uncertainty, BH-MCOs and primary contractors have announced to addiction and mental health treatment providers that they will not receive any increases in reimbursement rates in 2025, despite escalating provider costs. At the same time, in certain regions of the Commonwealth, addiction and mental health treatment providers are beginning to report increasing challenges in getting appropriate treatment authorized (e.g., decreased lengths of stay, increased denials). Although anecdotal, RCPA will continue to have these discussions and look to substantiating data.

The current HealthChoices crisis has been building since early 2024 and has caused much anxiety. So far, the proposed 2025/26 budget only exacerbates the worry. Add in the federal Medicaid and grant funding uncertainty coming out of Washington, DC following recent executive orders that potentially put funding streams like the Substance Use Prevention, Treatment, and Recovery Services Block Grant and SOR dollars at risk, and the calamity grows exponentially. Right now, we are looking at a real possibility of ongoing behavioral health service cuts that would be akin to rationing of care.

At this point, I am left with a few fundamental questions. How is $6.3 billion not enough to provide behavioral health services — addiction and mental health treatment — to Pennsylvania’s Medicaid population? How could the state have been so wrong on its calculations? How sustainable is a behavioral health system that needs at least upwards of $7 billion per year? Does the legislature have an appetite for such a system?

And, perhaps most importantly, what are the implications for the future of addiction treatment and the sustainability of the system as we currently know it? Beyond the funding crisis, the field continues to beg for relief from administrative burden and crushing oversight, pleas that have amounted to shouting into the void.

With DHS’s budget hearings coming up in early March in front of the Senate and House Appropriations Committees, I would expect the legislature to also be asking these same questions. Stay tuned.

RCPA Partner Eleos knows how to throw a party, and their virtual event next month is no exception. Join them for the debut of Eleos Compliance at their Winter 2025 Launch Event. 

This 1-hour virtual event will kick off with a product launch video, then AI experts and real-life Eleos customers will present New Year, New AI Advancements with Eleos Documentation and Compliance.

Eleos Compliance is a new AI-powered solution that enables behavioral health CDI and CQI teams to continually scan 100% of notes for six of the most common compliance red flags. By quickly identifying high risk areas, there’s more time to spend on staff education and training to prevent further issues. 

Register now to join them on February 19 at 12:00 pm Eastern, when Alon Joffe, Eleos Co-founder and CEO, will be joined by Eleos’ customers Rony Gadiwalla, CIO at GRAND Mental Health, and Tom Morgan, CIO at Merakey, to:

  • Define and explain the riskiest note compliance issues in behavioral health.
  • Detail how the NEW Eleos Compliance product — in conjunction with the new Eleos Documentation Dashboard — helps organizations proactively monitor, manage, and prevent documentation quality issues.
  • Showcase the measurable impact of AI-driven compliance and documentation technology at GRAND Mental Health.

It’s a great opportunity to get familiar with all the operational benefits specialized AI has to offer — and to discover why Eleos is the behavioral health technology providers (and leaders) actually love. 

Stay tuned for their next launch event in Q2!

Register for this exciting event now. If you can’t make it to the live event, you’ll receive an on-demand recording afterwards.