Share Your Thoughts on Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Parity

The Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Parity Task Force wants to hear about your experience with mental health and substance use disorder treatment services.

The comment period is open until Wednesday, August 31, 2016.

Share Your Experience with the Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Parity Task Force

The Task Force wants to hear from patients, families, consumer advocates, health care providers, insurers, and other stakeholders on their experience with mental health and substance use disorder parity requirements.

We welcome your comments on these topics by August 31, 2016:

Suggestions on how to improve understanding of parity among key stakeholders such as consumers, families, health care providers, and insurers.
What are some examples of the types of information you commonly see health plans and insurance issuers share with enrollees or providers when coverage for a mental health or substance use disorder benefit is denied?
When health plans provide parity compliance-related information, how easy or hard is it for consumers and providers to understand? Do consumers and providers know how to act on this information?
What additional tools, guidance or other strategies are needed to improve the information made available to consumers and providers and their understanding of how to act on it?
What are some best practices used by health plans and insurance issuers to share information with enrollees and their providers regarding the following topics:
- medical necessity criteria,
- why coverage is denied,
- how these policies are comparable to policies for coverage of medical/surgical benefits, and
- transparency in how the non-quantitative treatment limits in the coverage are designed and implemented.
What are some best practices used by state insurance commissioners to ensure the health plans and policies issued in their states are in compliance with parity?
How do health plans and issuers ensure that their policies are in compliance with parity, particularly the requirements regarding nonquantitative treatment limits (e.g., medical necessity requirements, utilization management techniques, provider network admissions criteria, and reimbursement rates)? What analyses are conducted? How are they conducted?
What additional actions could be taken to improve responsiveness to concerns regarding non-compliance with parity requirements, both on the part of insurance issuers and on the part of regulators?