The complete text of this report is available
directly from the GAO web site in Portable Document (PDF) format.
To view the report in PDF format, you first need to
download the free Adobe Acrobat Viewer. The Acrobat Viewer will launch the file so that
you can see the document on your monitor and then print it. Download Adobe Acrobat.
Download
the Report
|
|
May, 2000
United States General Accounting Office - Chairman, Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
U.S. Senate
Mental Health Parity Act
Despite New
Federal Standards,
Mental Health
Benefits Remain
Limited
Results in Brief
Most employers responding to our survey reported that they are
complying with the
federal mental health parity law, but because of its narrow scope
and reductions in mental
health benefits that the employers have made to offset
the required enhancements, compliance may have little effect on
employees access to
mental health services. Eighty-six percent of the responding
employers in the 26 states and the District of Columbia reported
that as of December 1999 their plans were in compliance with the
federal parity requirement
that annual and lifetime dollar limits for mental health
benefits be no more restrictive than those for all medical and
surgical benefits. Our
survey found that 14 percent of plans were noncomplianta
noncompliance rate similar to Labors preliminary estimates
based on investigations of employer-sponsored plans. In contrast,
in 1996 before the parity law was enacted, only about 55 percent
of responding employers
reported offering parity in dollar limits. Many responding
employers cited the federal Mental Health Parity Act as a significant
or primary reason for changing the dollar limits in their health
benefit plans.
Although most employers plans now have parity in dollar
limits for mental health
coverage, 87 percent of those that comply contain at least one
other plan design
feature that is more restrictive for mental health benefits than
for medical and surgical
benefits. For example, about 65 percent of plans restrict
the number of covered outpatient office visits and hospital days
for mental health
treatment further than those for other health treatment. In
addition, many employers may
have adopted newly restrictive mental health
benefit design features since 1996 specifically to offset the more
generous dollar limits they
adopted as a result of the federal law. About two-thirds
of these newly compliant employers changed at least one other
mental health benefit design
feature to a more restrictive one compared with
only about one-fourth of the employers that did not change their
dollar limits.
While most employers have not examined changes in their plans
claims costs, the
federal parity law appears to have had a negligible effect on
claims costs. Only about 3
percent of responding employers reported that compliance with the
law increased their claims costs, and virtually no employers
have dropped their mental health benefits or health coverage
altogether since the law was
enacted. In addition, published estimates of the
cost of federal parity are typically less than 1 percent. More
comprehensive parity laws as
enacted by some states are generally estimated
to have higher but modest cost increases of about 2 to 4 percent.
Federal agencies have made varying progress in performing their
oversight roles under
the parity law. Labor is in the process of expanding its oversight
role to include not only the
complaint-driven approach used in its oversight of
private employer-sponsored health plans but also one that in the
future may include
randomly selected employer investigations to gauge overall compliance
with parity and other federal standards. HCFA has not yet fully
determined the nature and
extent of its oversight responsibilities. Before it can
exercise an oversight role, it must first identify states that are
not enforcing the
federal standards. HCFA initially identified seven states that
appeared not to have a
parity law. As of May 2000, HCFA reported that four of
these states are enforcing the federal standards through
conforming legislation
or other means and that it is still working with the three other
states to assist them in
enacting similar protections. HCFA has determined that
laws in 20 states appear to fully conform to the federal standards
and is still
evaluating whether laws in the remaining 24 states fully conform
to the federal
standards.
Ordering Information
The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the following address, accompanied
by a check or money order made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary.
VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also. Orders for 100 or more copies to be
mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders by mail:
U.S. General Accounting Office
P.O. Box 37050
Washington, DC 20013
or visit:
Room 1100
700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)
U.S. General Accounting Office
Washington, DC
Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 or by using
fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537. Each day, GAO issues a list of newly
available reports and testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list
from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu
will provide information on how to obtain these lists.
For information on how to access GAO reports on
the Internet, send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to: info@www.gao.gov or visit GAOs World
Wide Web Home Page at: www.gao.gov
|