New Law Requires Health Plans to Demonstrate Compliance with Parity Requirements Between Mental Health and Medical Benefits

Beginning February 10, 2021, the U.S. Departments of Labor ("DOL"), Treasury, and/or Health and Human Services ("HHS") (collectively, the "Departments") may request employer-sponsored group health plans to provide evidence that their plans apply limitations on mental he...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Employee Benefit Plan Review 2021-06, Vol.75 (5), p.13-15
Hauptverfasser: Gray, Yelena F, Myers, Damian A, Gionnette, Lena
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 15
container_issue 5
container_start_page 13
container_title Employee Benefit Plan Review
container_volume 75
creator Gray, Yelena F
Myers, Damian A
Gionnette, Lena
description Beginning February 10, 2021, the U.S. Departments of Labor ("DOL"), Treasury, and/or Health and Human Services ("HHS") (collectively, the "Departments") may request employer-sponsored group health plans to provide evidence that their plans apply limitations on mental health and substance use disorder ("MH/SUD") benefits in parity with those they apply to medical/surgical ("M/S") benefits. [...]adequate compliance with the MHPAEA's NQTL requirements has been elusive, in part due to a lack of clear guidance from regulators on how plan sponsors and administrators can take steps to ensure compliance. Since the issuance of the regulations, the Departments published subregulatory guidance that emphasized the importance of compliance with the parity requirements.1 Recognizing the difficulty health plans experience complying with NQTL requirements, the recent focus has been on subregulatory guidance on NQTLs. In addition to the documented comparative analyses, the Secretary may request: * The terms of the plan containing the NQTL and MH/SUD and M/S benefits to which the limits apply; * Factors used to determine that the NQTL will apply to the benefits; * Evidentiary standards and other sources and evidence used to identify the factors described above; * Comparative analyses demonstrating that processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used to apply the NQTLs to MH/SUD benefits are comparable and applied no more stringently than those used in applying the NQTLs to medical/ surgical benefits; and * Disclosure of the specific findings and conclusions that indicate the plan is in compliance with the NQTL parity requirements. In that regard, sponsors and administrators should consider taking the following steps: * Conduct an initial review of quantitative treatment limitations to determine whether any parity compliance issues are apparent on the face of the plan design. * Sponsors and administrators with fully-insured health plans should reach out to their insurance carriers and request a copy of the most recent quantitative and NQTL comparative analyses. * Sponsors and administrators with self-insured health plans should work with their third-party administrators to conduct comparative analyses.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_reports_2629097356</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2629097356</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_reports_26290973563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjMsKwjAQRbNQ8PkPg3shWkx16wsXKiLuy6BTjKRJzYwU8eetoHtXl3s49zZUW-tRMjRTPW2pDvNNa23SkWmr154q2GIFR7o_bCSGDaGTKxwcegYJsKQieJaIQrAIReks-jNBZT8SRivP37YgLwxzkorIw65u6H536C81udhzjebkKbfCPdXM0TH1v9lVg_XqtNgMyxjuD2LJIpUhCmdjM57pWZpMTPKX9AbzHE0q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2629097356</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>New Law Requires Health Plans to Demonstrate Compliance with Parity Requirements Between Mental Health and Medical Benefits</title><source>Business Source Complete</source><creator>Gray, Yelena F ; Myers, Damian A ; Gionnette, Lena</creator><creatorcontrib>Gray, Yelena F ; Myers, Damian A ; Gionnette, Lena</creatorcontrib><description>Beginning February 10, 2021, the U.S. Departments of Labor ("DOL"), Treasury, and/or Health and Human Services ("HHS") (collectively, the "Departments") may request employer-sponsored group health plans to provide evidence that their plans apply limitations on mental health and substance use disorder ("MH/SUD") benefits in parity with those they apply to medical/surgical ("M/S") benefits. [...]adequate compliance with the MHPAEA's NQTL requirements has been elusive, in part due to a lack of clear guidance from regulators on how plan sponsors and administrators can take steps to ensure compliance. Since the issuance of the regulations, the Departments published subregulatory guidance that emphasized the importance of compliance with the parity requirements.1 Recognizing the difficulty health plans experience complying with NQTL requirements, the recent focus has been on subregulatory guidance on NQTLs. In addition to the documented comparative analyses, the Secretary may request: * The terms of the plan containing the NQTL and MH/SUD and M/S benefits to which the limits apply; * Factors used to determine that the NQTL will apply to the benefits; * Evidentiary standards and other sources and evidence used to identify the factors described above; * Comparative analyses demonstrating that processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used to apply the NQTLs to MH/SUD benefits are comparable and applied no more stringently than those used in applying the NQTLs to medical/ surgical benefits; and * Disclosure of the specific findings and conclusions that indicate the plan is in compliance with the NQTL parity requirements. In that regard, sponsors and administrators should consider taking the following steps: * Conduct an initial review of quantitative treatment limitations to determine whether any parity compliance issues are apparent on the face of the plan design. * Sponsors and administrators with fully-insured health plans should reach out to their insurance carriers and request a copy of the most recent quantitative and NQTL comparative analyses. * Sponsors and administrators with self-insured health plans should work with their third-party administrators to conduct comparative analyses.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0013-6808</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Aspen Publishers, Inc</publisher><subject>Comparative analysis ; Compliance ; Consolidated Appropriations Act 2021-US ; Departments ; Drug use ; Mental health ; Noncompliance ; Parity ; Substance abuse treatment ; Substance use disorder</subject><ispartof>Employee Benefit Plan Review, 2021-06, Vol.75 (5), p.13-15</ispartof><rights>Copyright Aspen Publishers, Inc. Jun 2021</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>312,776,780,787</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gray, Yelena F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Myers, Damian A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gionnette, Lena</creatorcontrib><title>New Law Requires Health Plans to Demonstrate Compliance with Parity Requirements Between Mental Health and Medical Benefits</title><title>Employee Benefit Plan Review</title><description>Beginning February 10, 2021, the U.S. Departments of Labor ("DOL"), Treasury, and/or Health and Human Services ("HHS") (collectively, the "Departments") may request employer-sponsored group health plans to provide evidence that their plans apply limitations on mental health and substance use disorder ("MH/SUD") benefits in parity with those they apply to medical/surgical ("M/S") benefits. [...]adequate compliance with the MHPAEA's NQTL requirements has been elusive, in part due to a lack of clear guidance from regulators on how plan sponsors and administrators can take steps to ensure compliance. Since the issuance of the regulations, the Departments published subregulatory guidance that emphasized the importance of compliance with the parity requirements.1 Recognizing the difficulty health plans experience complying with NQTL requirements, the recent focus has been on subregulatory guidance on NQTLs. In addition to the documented comparative analyses, the Secretary may request: * The terms of the plan containing the NQTL and MH/SUD and M/S benefits to which the limits apply; * Factors used to determine that the NQTL will apply to the benefits; * Evidentiary standards and other sources and evidence used to identify the factors described above; * Comparative analyses demonstrating that processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used to apply the NQTLs to MH/SUD benefits are comparable and applied no more stringently than those used in applying the NQTLs to medical/ surgical benefits; and * Disclosure of the specific findings and conclusions that indicate the plan is in compliance with the NQTL parity requirements. In that regard, sponsors and administrators should consider taking the following steps: * Conduct an initial review of quantitative treatment limitations to determine whether any parity compliance issues are apparent on the face of the plan design. * Sponsors and administrators with fully-insured health plans should reach out to their insurance carriers and request a copy of the most recent quantitative and NQTL comparative analyses. * Sponsors and administrators with self-insured health plans should work with their third-party administrators to conduct comparative analyses.</description><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Compliance</subject><subject>Consolidated Appropriations Act 2021-US</subject><subject>Departments</subject><subject>Drug use</subject><subject>Mental health</subject><subject>Noncompliance</subject><subject>Parity</subject><subject>Substance abuse treatment</subject><subject>Substance use disorder</subject><issn>0013-6808</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNqNjMsKwjAQRbNQ8PkPg3shWkx16wsXKiLuy6BTjKRJzYwU8eetoHtXl3s49zZUW-tRMjRTPW2pDvNNa23SkWmr154q2GIFR7o_bCSGDaGTKxwcegYJsKQieJaIQrAIReks-jNBZT8SRivP37YgLwxzkorIw65u6H536C81udhzjebkKbfCPdXM0TH1v9lVg_XqtNgMyxjuD2LJIpUhCmdjM57pWZpMTPKX9AbzHE0q</recordid><startdate>20210601</startdate><enddate>20210601</enddate><creator>Gray, Yelena F</creator><creator>Myers, Damian A</creator><creator>Gionnette, Lena</creator><general>Aspen Publishers, Inc</general><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0F</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210601</creationdate><title>New Law Requires Health Plans to Demonstrate Compliance with Parity Requirements Between Mental Health and Medical Benefits</title><author>Gray, Yelena F ; Myers, Damian A ; Gionnette, Lena</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_reports_26290973563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Compliance</topic><topic>Consolidated Appropriations Act 2021-US</topic><topic>Departments</topic><topic>Drug use</topic><topic>Mental health</topic><topic>Noncompliance</topic><topic>Parity</topic><topic>Substance abuse treatment</topic><topic>Substance use disorder</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gray, Yelena F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Myers, Damian A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gionnette, Lena</creatorcontrib><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Trade &amp; Industry</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Employee Benefit Plan Review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gray, Yelena F</au><au>Myers, Damian A</au><au>Gionnette, Lena</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>New Law Requires Health Plans to Demonstrate Compliance with Parity Requirements Between Mental Health and Medical Benefits</atitle><jtitle>Employee Benefit Plan Review</jtitle><date>2021-06-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>75</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>13</spage><epage>15</epage><pages>13-15</pages><issn>0013-6808</issn><abstract>Beginning February 10, 2021, the U.S. Departments of Labor ("DOL"), Treasury, and/or Health and Human Services ("HHS") (collectively, the "Departments") may request employer-sponsored group health plans to provide evidence that their plans apply limitations on mental health and substance use disorder ("MH/SUD") benefits in parity with those they apply to medical/surgical ("M/S") benefits. [...]adequate compliance with the MHPAEA's NQTL requirements has been elusive, in part due to a lack of clear guidance from regulators on how plan sponsors and administrators can take steps to ensure compliance. Since the issuance of the regulations, the Departments published subregulatory guidance that emphasized the importance of compliance with the parity requirements.1 Recognizing the difficulty health plans experience complying with NQTL requirements, the recent focus has been on subregulatory guidance on NQTLs. In addition to the documented comparative analyses, the Secretary may request: * The terms of the plan containing the NQTL and MH/SUD and M/S benefits to which the limits apply; * Factors used to determine that the NQTL will apply to the benefits; * Evidentiary standards and other sources and evidence used to identify the factors described above; * Comparative analyses demonstrating that processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used to apply the NQTLs to MH/SUD benefits are comparable and applied no more stringently than those used in applying the NQTLs to medical/ surgical benefits; and * Disclosure of the specific findings and conclusions that indicate the plan is in compliance with the NQTL parity requirements. In that regard, sponsors and administrators should consider taking the following steps: * Conduct an initial review of quantitative treatment limitations to determine whether any parity compliance issues are apparent on the face of the plan design. * Sponsors and administrators with fully-insured health plans should reach out to their insurance carriers and request a copy of the most recent quantitative and NQTL comparative analyses. * Sponsors and administrators with self-insured health plans should work with their third-party administrators to conduct comparative analyses.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Aspen Publishers, Inc</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0013-6808
ispartof Employee Benefit Plan Review, 2021-06, Vol.75 (5), p.13-15
issn 0013-6808
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_reports_2629097356
source Business Source Complete
subjects Comparative analysis
Compliance
Consolidated Appropriations Act 2021-US
Departments
Drug use
Mental health
Noncompliance
Parity
Substance abuse treatment
Substance use disorder
title New Law Requires Health Plans to Demonstrate Compliance with Parity Requirements Between Mental Health and Medical Benefits
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T02%3A03%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=New%20Law%20Requires%20Health%20Plans%20to%20Demonstrate%20Compliance%20with%20Parity%20Requirements%20Between%20Mental%20Health%20and%20Medical%20Benefits&rft.jtitle=Employee%20Benefit%20Plan%20Review&rft.au=Gray,%20Yelena%20F&rft.date=2021-06-01&rft.volume=75&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=13&rft.epage=15&rft.pages=13-15&rft.issn=0013-6808&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2629097356%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2629097356&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true