TRICARE Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Benefit
Comparison with Medicaid and Commercial Benefits
ResearchPublished Jan 11, 2016
This study compared the Applied Behavior Analysis benefit provided by TRICARE as an early intervention for autism spectrum disorder with similar benefits in Medicaid and commercial health insurance plans. The study focused on comparing a proposed TRICARE reimbursement rate decrease from $125 per hour to $68 per hour for such services performed by a Board Certified Behavior Analyst to reimbursement rates in other plans.
Comparison with Medicaid and Commercial Benefits
ResearchPublished Jan 11, 2016
This study compared the Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) benefit provided by TRICARE as an early intervention for autism spectrum disorder with similar benefits in Medicaid and commercial health insurance plans. The sponsor, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, was particularly interested in how a proposed TRICARE reimbursement rate decrease from $125 per hour to $68 per hour for ABA services performed by a Board Certified Behavior Analyst compared with reimbursement rates (defined as third-party payment to the service provider) in Medicaid and commercial health insurance plans. Information on ABA coverage in state Medicaid programs was collected from Medicaid state waiver databases; subsequently, Medicaid provider reimbursement data were collected from state Medicaid fee schedules. Applied Behavior Analysis provider reimbursement in the commercial health insurance system was estimated using Truven Health MarketScan® data. A weighted mean U.S. reimbursement rate was calculated for several services using cross-state information on the number of children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Locations of potential provider shortages were also identified. Medicaid and commercial insurance reimbursement rates varied considerably across the United States. This project concluded that the proposed $68-per-hour reimbursement rate for services provided by a board certified analyst was more than 25 percent below the U.S. mean.
This research was sponsored by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (OUSD [P&R]) and conducted within the Forces and Resources Policy Center of the RAND National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Marine Corps, the defense agencies, and the Defense Intelligence Community.
This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.