Follow us on Twitter  Like the Connecticut Health Policy Project on Facebook  Read the CT Health Notes Blog  Subscribe to the CT Health Notes Newsletter
Connecticut Health Policy Project
  Improving Connecticut's Health Through Information

CT Health Reform Dashboard

October 2016

2016 Health Thoughtleader survey - CT gets C+ for reform

Current Status

down Controversial Cabinet reform proposal misses what is working in Connecticut; advocates payment model with "perverse incentives"
 ? Prioritize meaningful evaluation to protect consumers and taxpayers in Medicaid redesign
Up Medicaid savings, quality improvement strengthen
Up SIM ethics concerns growing
 ?  Hospital consolidation and regulatory

Action Items

  • Protect consumers and taxpayers from payment models with incentives to deny appropriate care
  • Avoid past mistakes and protect success with robust evaluation in Medicaid reform
  • Ensure reforms make sense for Connecticut - what works well elsewhere may not travel well
  • Carefully monitor both vertical and horizontal consolidation of providers and insurers for cost, quality and access; strengthen monitoring capacity
  • Strong conflict of interest provisions in all reforms


Medicaid Up

  • Keep administration's commitment not to implement experimental, troubling downside risk arrangement
  • Effective reform needs strong evaluation to succeed and limit unintended harm
  • PCHM+ reform decisions set - pros and cons
  • Per person costs under control
  • Quality, access up
  • Made costly, questionable CCIP plan optional, use evidence to redesign
  • Must protect successful PCMHs in new reforms
  • Studying high-cost, high-need patients to design thoughtful intervention
  • Promising homelessness partnership

Payment & Delivery Reform Down

  • Build on what works in Connecticut
  • Cabinet considering unworkable reform proposal; would violate administration promise
  • Large YNNH expansion approval risks monopoly price increases, service loss, and less consumer choice
  • Taskforce meeting to update CON process
  • SIM process plagued with ethics concerns, little transparency, insular leadership, lack of vision
  • Take state action to control drug costs


Quality Down

  • Quality information confusing, not easy to access
  • Comparative effectiveness research not well used in policymaking or consumer information
  • Serious, ongoing quality problems across CT hospitals
  • Rush to "align" quality metrics, especially for payment, across diverse populations leaves many out, not protective

Health Insurance Down

  • Lower skyrocketing health insurer rate hikes
  • Must regulate ACOs as they take on financial risk
  • Assist consumers to access the care they paid for
  • Insurer-dominated board, members with conflicted interests and investments
  • Privacy and security concerns throughout insurance sector
  • Exchange must work to lower costs and make coverage affordable

Health Information Technology Up

  • Must protect privacy and security of sensitive patient medical information
  • Troubling HIT Council leadership shift; must avoid past errors, conflicts of interest
  • All-payer claims database development slow, rejected consumer privacy protections

Workforce Down

CT Health Reform Dashboard Archive