• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • File a Report
  • Check Report
  • Client Login

Red Flag Reporting

Protecting Organizations & Their People

  • Home
  • About RFR
    • Our Team and Expertise
    • Who Do We Help?
    • Published Articles
  • Services
    • Hotline Service
    • Compliance Services
  • Benefits
    • Protect Employees
    • Protect Your Reputation
    • Protect Your Bottom Line
    • Manage Cases with Ease
  • Blog
  • Get Started
    • FAQ
    • Request a Demo or Quote
  • Contact Us

October 18, 2021

Amendment Updates Mental Health Rules

Share on LinkedIn Share
Share on Facebook Share
Share on TwitterTweet

Under an amendment to the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act brought on by the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, sponsors of group health plans are required to perform an analysis of the plan’s non-quantitative treatment limitations for mental health and addiction benefits compared to those for medical and surgical benefits. Put simply, the Mental Health Parity and Addictions Equity Act of 2008 aims to end disparities between health plan coverage of mental health and addiction services and coverage of medical and surgical services. Health plan coverage is limited by both quantitative treatment limitations (QTLs) and nonquantitative treatment limitations (NQTLs). Quantitate treatment limitations can be easily counted, such as the number of visits covered and the out-of-pocket cost to patients. Nonquantitative treatment limitations, on the other hand, are based on standards and restrictions that cannot be counted. Examples include the criteria for considering treatment to be of medical necessity, standards for in-network providers, and restrictions in coverage based on geographic location. The American Psychological Association’s article, “What do employers need to know about parity,” explains, “Plans must ensure that these and other nonquantitative treatment limitations imposed on mental health and substance use benefits are comparable and no more stringently applied than the same limitations imposed on physical health benefits in the same kind of care, such as in-network outpatient services.”

Disparity in Mental Health Care Coverage

The Center for Workplace Mental Health breaks down the issues surrounding mental health parity in its article, “Fair Insurance Coverage for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Care.” The article lists common barriers to mental health care including difficulty finding in-network providers, lengthy wait times, coverage denials due to “restrictive utilization review and prior authorization criteria,” and high out-of-pocket costs. It explains that federal and state laws on mental health parity were enacted “to protect people who need care for mental health and substance use conditions by ending discriminatory practices in health plan benefit coverage.” Despite the enactment of these laws, disparities between mental health and addiction coverage and physical health coverage still exist. The American Psychological Association’s article, “What do employers need to know about parity,” reports that out-of-network use disparities and reimbursement rate disparities have actually increased in recent years. Clearly, there is still room for improvement when it comes to health plans offering equitable mental health and addiction care benefits.

Why Employers Should Care

Employers have the legal obligation to sponsor a health plan that offers equitable mental health and substance use care benefits. This, however, is not the only reason employers should be concerned about mental health parity. Untreated mental health conditions are extremely costly to businesses in terms of performance, lost productivity, retention, overall healthcare costs, and rising disability rates according to the Center for Workplace Mental Health. Alarmingly, the Center for Disease Control estimates that depression, alone, causes 200 million lost workdays in the United States each year, costing employers between $17 and $44 million!

How Must Employers Ensure Compliance?

As mentioned above, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 requires sponsors of group health plans (i.e., employers) to perform an analysis of the plan’s non-quantitative treatment limitations for mental health and addiction care benefits compared to those for medical and surgical care benefits. The SHRM article, “DOL, State Regulators Step Up Enforcement Around Mental Health Parity,” provides more details about this requirement. The article states that the analysis must explain, “whether the factors used to justify NQTLs for mental health coverage differ from limits imposed for medical and surgical benefits.” Furthermore, employers are responsible for providing the analysis to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) upon request. The article closes by citing advice from former DOL auditor, Rory Kane Akers, who recommends that employers request the mental health parity comparative analysis from their insurance carriers or third-party administrators sooner rather than later. If the insurance carrier or third-party administrator is unwilling to produce or help with the comparative analysis, it is important to document the lack of compliance. Akers explains that while employers are ultimately responsible for ensuring plan compliance, the DOL should take issue with the noncompliant insurance carrier or third-party administrator.

In summary, disparities in mental health and addiction care insurance coverage are an ongoing legal and societal issue despite federal and state legislation promoting equity. In response, the recent amendment to the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act places increased responsibility on employers for ensuring health plan compliance.

Encourage your employees to speak-up, through your hotline or otherwise, when they see a lack of parity.  How do you do that?  See our article here.

Share on LinkedIn Share
Share on Facebook Share
Share on TwitterTweet

Filed Under: Uncategorized

We are Red Flag Reporting

We offer ethics, safety and fraud hotline / case management solutions to our clients via the web, over the phone and through other methods. Trusted by organizations large and small in 50 countries, we can help you!

We are an Ethics Hotline Service Provider
Find Out More  Get a Quote

Primary Sidebar

Hotline and Web Portal

We are an Ethics Hotline Service Provider

Get a Quote

We offer ethics, safety and fraud hotline / case management solutions to our clients via the web, over the phone and through other methods. Trusted by organizations large and small in 50 countries, we can help you!

Red Flag Reporting is Hiring!

About Red Flag Reporting Founded in 2010, …

[Read Article...] about Red Flag Reporting is Hiring!

Best Practices for Preventing a Workplace Retaliation Claim

Retaliation is the most frequent type of claim …

[Read Article...] about Best Practices for Preventing a Workplace Retaliation Claim

Internal Whistleblowers Face Few Protections: Why This Matters

The decision to become a whistleblower is never …

[Read Article...] about Internal Whistleblowers Face Few Protections: Why This Matters

Footer

Follow Along

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Red Flag Reporting

Red Flag Reporting provides compliance and ethics hotline services and case management software solutions to organizations seeking to promote safe and ethical behavior.

Reach Us

Red Flag Reporting
P.O. Box 4230, Akron, Ohio 44321
Contact Us

(Sales Office only – not a reporting line)
Tel: 877-676-6551
Fax: 330-572-8146

NOTE: Red Flag Reporting services are available for purchase by organizations only. We do not sell or provide our services to individual people.

  

 

Copyright © 2023 Red Flag Reporting all rights reserved. All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective holders.

  • Red Flag Reporting – Ethics, Fraud and Whistleblower Hotline Service
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy