States failing on price transparency
All but five states received a failing grade this year on the way they provide healthcare price transparency, according to a report by Catalyst for Payment Reform and the Health Care Incentives Improvement Institute.
The second annual Report Card on State Price Transparency Laws took a deeper look this year at public websites. The 2014 grades came in lower than in last year’s report because the Report Card no longer graded states only on the laws they have adopted to promote price transparency, but also on states’ price transparency regulations, price transparency websites (to the extent they exist), and all payer claims databases – the ideal source of data for these websites because they contain more accurate, complete price information.
Only two states received a B (Maine and Massachusetts), and no states earned an A. Colorado, Vermont and Virginia received a grade of C, and the remaining 45 states received a failing grade.
“Access to meaningful price information is more important than ever as consumers continue to take on a rising share of expenses,” said Suzanne Delbanco, executive director of CPR in a news release. “While many states have made progress, there’s still much more work to be done for the majority of residents in the United States to have access to essential information on the price of health care.”
States that relied on all-payer claims databases as the source of price information for consumers received higher grades, as did states with adequate, fully operational, consumer friendly websites (mandated by law).
Some states have robust price transparency laws and regulations on the books, requiring them to create a publicly available website — but often the public can’t readily access price information because the website is poorly designed, or inadequately functioning. As an example, New Hampshire – a state that received an A in last year’s Report Card — received an F this year, because its website is inoperative and may remain so for an extended period.
To get a high score, a state needed to have both the “spirit of the law” — public access to a fully functioning website, and the “letter of the law” – robust legislation and regulations on the books ensuring the price information would remain accessible.
“American consumers deserve easy access to robust information about the cost and quality of their health care," said Francois de Brantes, HCI3 executive director, "and we’re especially disappointed that populous states with large numbers of consumers, such as New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas didn’t take steps to raise their failing grades."
