The debate within the U.S. government about reforming the health care system centers on ways to control rising costs and assure high-quality, affordable care. RAND Health and its health care reform initiative—RAND COMPARE (Comprehensive Assessment of Reform Efforts)—provide objective research and analysis on topics that can inform the health care reform debate, including financing; increasing access, insurance coverage, and quality; decreasing costs; and promoting wellness and prevention.
Amid mounting political pressure and angst in the business community, the Obama administration announced an additional delay in enforcing the employer mandate component of the Affordable Care Act for some firms until 2016. The additional delay will have little impact.
Whether the public will begin to settle on an overall positive or negative perception of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is very much an open question. But understanding how opinion of the law evolves over time could offer valuable insight into Americans' appetite both for the ACA and for health reform more broadly.
Expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is both contentious and complicated. RAND mathematician Carter Price has been using the COMPARE model to help those making decisions understand what their choices mean for their budgets and population health.
The bottom line is that the employer mandate does not provide a large inducement for firms to change their health insurance offerings, but it does raise a substantial amount of money to pay for the ACA's coverage provisions over time.
Because of the ACA's regulations, some smaller employers with young and healthy workers are considering avoiding the purchase of health care coverage in the regulated market, opting instead to self-insure their employees.
While a governor or legislator may disagree with Medicaid expansion for philosophical reasons, the claims that the expansion will be a burden on states' economies seem misguided given the full range of projected economic impacts on the states, writes Carter C. Price.
Regardless of which candidate wins in November, and regardless of whether “Obamacare” is repealed, amended, or defended by the next Congress, the next president will have to contend with the spiraling cost of health care in the United States—a problem that is growing more acute with each passing year, writes Arthur Kellermann.
Despite high per-capita expenditures in the U.S., Americans under the age of 65 are less likely than their peers in France, Germany, or the United Kingdom to receive timely and appropriate health care, writes Ellen Nolte.
The bottom line is this: With or without the Affordable Care Act, the nation can no longer kick the can down the road on costs, writes Arthur Kellermann.
Although health care organizations have favorable characteristics that can maximize IT's benefits, the reengineering of health care delivery is only beginning.
Evidence from past efforts in the U.S. and abroad suggests that the full potential of health reform will not be realized without specific efforts to reduce disparities, write Robin M. Weinick, Malcom V. Williams, and Romana Hasnain-Wynia.
Because the budget crisis is really a crisis, it behooves physicians to answer the waste question as rapidly as possible. Without an answer, there is no hope that an appropriate policy process for reining in health care costs will be identified, writes Robert H. Brook.
The ongoing evolution of the health care system is leading US households toward greater responsibility for their own well-being. With this responsibility, however, comes an increasing need to be able to find, trust, use, and act on relevant information to make informed choices, write Laurie T. Martin and Ruth M. Parker.
The movement toward reporting results of surgeons and hospitals will probably lead to a society in which the wealthy receive care from the better hospitals and physicians, writes Robert H. Brook.
Can the health care system handle the demands of 30 million-plus new customers?, asks Elizabeth McGlynn.
How close do you think that the health care reform plan would come, in reality, to achieving each goal? On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 is extremely close, and 1 is not at all close.
To clear up some of the confusion about the newly approved health care legislation, Elizabeth McGlynn debunks some common misconceptions about the bill.
To provide a context for understanding health insurance premium price increases, this document identifies the factors that insurance companies consider when setting rates for the next year.
What can you choose when life restricts you to the narrow width of a hospital bed and your view is one of life's final horizon, ask Steven M. Asch, Karl Lorenz, and Diane Meier.
RAND's latest analysis of options for reducing the number of uninsured shows that among all the options included in the House tri-committee bill, the Senate HELP bill, and the proposal released by Senator Max Baucus, the individual mandate would have the greatest impact, writes Elizabeth McGlynn.