Filling the need for trusted information on health issues…

Trending on kff Enrollment Marketplaces Medicare Advantage

2012 Employer Health Benefits Survey

Section 2: Health Benefit Offer Rates
  1. The large increase in 2010 was largely driven by a significant (12 percentage point) increase in offering among firms with 3 to 9 workers (from 47% in 2009 to 59% in 2010).  This year, 50% of firms with 3 to 9 employees offer health benefits, a level that is more consistent with levels from recent years other than 2010.  

    ← Return to text

Section 3: Employee Coverage, Eligibility, and Participation
  1. Kaiser Family Foundation, Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, The Uninsured: A Primer, October 2011. http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7451-07.pdf. 56.2% of the non-elderly American population receives insurance coverage through an employer-sponsored plan.

    ← Return to text

  2. In 2009, Kaiser/HRET began weighting the percentage of workers that take up coverage by the number of workers eligible for coverage.  The historical take up estimates have also been updated.  See the Survey Design and Methods section for more information. 

    ← Return to text

Section 4: Types of Plans Offered
  1. Starting in 2010 we included firms that said they offer a plan type even if there are no covered workers in that plan type.

    ← Return to text

Section 6: Worker and Employer Contributions for Premiums
  1. Estimates for premiums, worker contributions to premiums, and employer contributions to premiums presented in Section 6 do not include contributions made by the employer to Health Savings Accounts or Health Reimbursement Arrangements.  See Section 8 for estimates of employer contributions to HSAs and HRAs.  

    ← Return to text

  2. For definitions of Self-Funded and Fully Insured plans, see the introduction to Section 10. 

    ← Return to text

Section 7: Employee Cost Sharing
  1. Some workers with separate per-person deductibles or out-of-pocket maximums for family coverage do not have a specific number of family members that are required to meet the deductible amount and instead have another type of limit, such as a per person amount with a total dollar amount limit.  These responses are included in the averages and distributions for separate family deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums.

    ← Return to text

  2. Starting in 2010, the survey asked about the prevalence and cost of physician office visits separately for primary care and specialty care.  Prior to the 2010 survey if the respondent indicated the plan had a copayment for office visits, we assumed the plan had a copayment for both primary and specialty care visits.  The survey did not allow for a respondent to report that a plan had a copayment for primary care visits and coinsurance for visits with a specialist physician. The changes made in 2010 allow for variations in the type of cost sharing for primary care and specialty care.  This year the survey includes cost sharing for in-network services only.  See the 2007 survey for information on out-of-network office visit cost sharing.

    ← Return to text

  3. The average copayments and the average coinsurance for emergency room visits include workers who may have a more than one type of cost sharing. 

    ← Return to text

Section 8: High-Deductible Health Plans with Savings Option
  1. There is no legal requirement for the minimum deductible in a plan offered with an HRA.  The survey defines a high-deductible HRA plan as a plan with a deductible of at least $1,000 for single coverage and $2,000 for family coverage.  Federal law requires a deductible of at least $1,200 for single coverage and $2,400 for family coverage for HSA-qualified HDHPs in 2012.  See the Text Box for more information on HDHP/HRAs and HSA-qualified HDHPs.

    ← Return to text

  2. The definitions of HDHP/SOs do not include other consumer-driven plan options, such as arrangements that combine an HRA with a lower-deductible health plan or arrangements in which an insurer (rather than the employer as in the case of HRAs or the enrollee as in the case of HSAs) establishes an account for each enrollee.  Other arrangements may be included in future surveys as the market evolves.

    ← Return to text

  3. See U.S. Department of the Treasury, Health Savings Accounts, available at http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Taxes/Pages/HSA-2012-indexed-amounts.aspx

    ← Return to text

  4. The average out-of-pocket maximum for HDHP/HRAs is calculated for plans with an out-of-pocket maximum.  About 10% of covered workers in HDHP/HRAs with single coverage or family coverage are in plans that reported having no limit on out-of-pocket expenses.

    ← Return to text

  5. In the survey, we ask, “Up to what dollar amount does your firm promise to contribute each year to an employee’s HRA or health reimbursement arrangement for single coverage?”  We refer to the amount that the employer commits to make available to an HRA as a contribution for ease of discussion.  As discussed, HRAs are notional accounts, and employers are not required to actually transfer funds until an employee incurs expenses.  Thus, employers may not expend the entire amount that they commit to make available to their employees through an HRA. 

    ← Return to text

Section 10: Plan Funding
  1. This includes stoploss insurance plans that limit a firm's per employee spending as well as plans that limit both a firm's overall spending and per employee spending.

    ← Return to text

  2. The average attachment point in small firms (3 to 199 workers) is about $140,000, which is almost twice the amount reported last year for small firms.  This value has a very high relative standard error (40%) because there are very few small employers that self-fund represented in the survey and one firm reported a very high value ($2,000,000).  Including this firm increases the average by almost 100%.

    ← Return to text

Section 12: Wellness Programs and Health Risk Assessments
  1. Respondents were given the option to report “other” types of wellness programs.  If those firms that responded “other” are included, the percentage offering at least one wellness benefit is 64%.  Two percent of firms indicating "other" said that they had an employee assistance program (EAP) and 5% said that they offered flu shots.  In 2012, biometric screening was added to the list of wellness programs.

    ← Return to text

  2. Firms that offer only web-based resources or a wellness newsletter were not asked questions about any financial incentives provided. 

    ← Return to text

  3. Financial incentives include: workers pay smaller percentage of the premium, workers have smaller deductibles, receive higher HRA or HSA contributions, or receive gift cards, travel merchandise, or cash.

    ← Return to text

  4. Eight percent of firms reported “don’t know” when asked their primary reason for offering wellness programs.

    ← Return to text

  5. In 2012, the percentage of firms was limited to firms who offer a high deductible plan with a savings option.

    ← Return to text

  6. Twelve percent of firms responded "Don't Know" to whether they think offering wellness programs is effective in improving the health of employees.  Thirteen percent said "Don't Know" to whether they think wellness programs are effective in reducing health care costs.se

    ← Return to text

  7. The survey asks firms offering at least one wellness program if most of the wellness benefits are provided by the health plan or by the firm. 

    ← Return to text

  8. The estimate for small firms is not reported in the text because of the high standard error associated with this estimate. Although 19 percent of small firms that ask their employees to complete a health risk assessment reported that they offer a financial incentive, the relative standard error is 0.36, which indicates considerable uncertainty. The difference between large and small firms is statistically significant at the 0.05 confidence level.

    ← Return to text

  9. The percentages of small and large firms offering financial rewards or penalties for completing wellness programs are not significantly different. The small firm estimates are not reported because of the high relative standard errors for the percent for firms which levy financial penalties for not completing wellness programs (0.56).

    ← Return to text

  10. The percentages of small and large firms offering financial rewards or penalties for not meeting biometric outcomes are not significantly different. The small firm estimates are not reported because of the high relative standard errors for the percent for firms which levy financial penalties for not meeting biometric outcomes (0.68). Smoking cessation is not included as a biometric outcome within this question.

    ← Return to text

Section 13: Health Reform
  1. Federal Register. Vol. 75, No. 116, June 17, 2010, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-06-17/pdf/2010-14614.pdf, and No. 221, Nov. 17, 2010, http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-28861.pdf.

     

    ← Return to text

  2. United States. Congressional Research Service CRS. Open CRS. By Bernadette Fernandez. Grandfathered Health Plans Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), Jan. 3, 2011. http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R41166_20110103.pdf.

    ← Return to text

  3. Federal Register. Vol. 75, No. 92, May 13, 2010, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-05-13/pdf/2010-11391.pdf.

    ← Return to text

  4. In 2011 firms that did not know if they enrolled adult children due to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) were not imputed.  If a similar approach had been followed in 2012, an estimated 2.8 million children would have enrolled on a parent's health plan due to the Affordable Care Act.  Using either approach the 2012 estimate is a significant increase over 2011.  In 2012 5% of firms offering family coverage did not know whether they enrolled adult dependents due to the ACA, more than the 1% who did not know in 2011.

    ← Return to text

Survey Design and Methods
  1. HDHP/SO includes high-deductible health plans offered with either a Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA) or a Health Savings Account (HSA).  Although HRAs can be offered along with a health plan that is not an HDHP, the survey collected information only on HRAs that are offered along with HDHPs.  For specific definitions of HDHPs, HRAs, and HSAs, see the introduction to Section 8.

    ← Return to text

  2. HDHP/SO premium estimates do not include contributions made by the employer to Health Savings Accounts or Health Reimbursement Arrangements.  

    ← Return to text

  3. In total, 166 firms participated in 2010 and 2012, 323 firms participated in 2011 and 2012, and 1,090 firms participated in 2010, 2011, and 2012. 

    ← Return to text

  4. Response rate estimates are calculated by dividing the number of completes over the number of refusals and the fraction of the firms with unknown eligibility to participate estimated to be eligible.  Firms determined to be ineligible to complete the survey are not included in the response rate calculation.

    ← Return to text

  5. Estimates presented in Exhibits 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 are based on the sample of both firms that completed the entire survey and those that answered just one question about whether they offer health benefits.

    ← Return to text

  6. Comparisons of estimates before and after this change are available at "Supplement on Updated Weighting Methodology," http://www.kff.org/insurance/8225.cfm.

    ← Return to text

  7. In 2012, less than one percent of covered workers are enrolled in a conventional plan.

    ← Return to text

  8. Analysis of the 2011 survey data using both R and SUDAAN (the statistical package used prior to 2012) produced the same estimates and standard errors.  Research Triangle Institute (2008).  SUDAAN Software for the Statistical Analysis of Correlated Data, Release 10.0, Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute.

    ← Return to text

  9. A supplement with standard errors for select estimates can be found online at Technical Supplement: Standard Error Tables for Selected Estimates, http://www.kff.org/insurance/8345.cfm.

    ← Return to text

x

Exhibit 2.1

Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits, 1999–2012
2012 EHBS 2.1
x

Exhibit 2.2

Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits, by Firm Size, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 2.2
x

Exhibit 2.3

Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits, by Firm Size, Region, and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 2.3
x

Exhibit 2.4

Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits, by Firm Characteristics, 2012
2012 EHBS 2.4
x

Exhibit 2.5

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Offer Health Benefits to Part-Time Workers, by Firm Size, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 2.5
x

Exhibit 2.7

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Offer Health Benefits to Part-Time Workers, by Firm Size, 1999–2012
2012 EHBS 2.7
x

Exhibit 2.6

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Offer Health Benefits to Temporary Workers, by Firm Size, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 2.6
x

Exhibit 2.8

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Offer Health Benefits to Temporary Workers, by Firm Size, 1999–2012
2012 EHBS 2.8
x

Exhibit 2.10

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Offer or Contribute to a Separate Benefit Plan Providing Dental or Vision Benefits, by Firm Size, 2000-2012
2012 EHBS 2.10
x

Exhibit 2.9

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Offer or Contribute to a Separate Benefit Plan Providing Dental or Vision Benefits, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 2.9
x

Exhibit 2.13

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percent of Employers That Offer Health Benefits to Unmarried Opposite-Sex and Same-Sex Domestic Partners, by Firm Size, 2008, 2009 & 2012
2012 EHBS 2.13
x

Exhibit 2.11

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Distribution of Whether Employers Offer Health Benefits to Unmarried Opposite-Sex Domestic Partners, by Firm Size and Region, 2012
2012 EHBS 2.11
x

Exhibit 2.12

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Distribution of Whether Employers Offer Health Benefits to Unmarried Same-Sex Domestic Partners, by Firm Size and Region, 2012
2012 EHBS 2.12
x

Exhibit 2.14

Among Small Firms (3-199 Workers) Not Offering Health Benefits, the Most Important Reason for Not Offering, 2012
2012 EHBS 2.14
x

Exhibit 2.16

Among Small Firms (3-199 Workers) Not Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Provide Employees Funds to Purchase Non-Group Insurance, 2012
2012 EHBS 2.16
x

Exhibit 2.15

Among Small Firms (3-199 Workers) Not Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Report the Following Activities Regarding Health Benefits, 2007-2012
2012 EHBS 2.15
x

Exhibit 3.2

Eligibility, Take-Up Rate, and Coverage in Firms Offering Health Benefits, by Firm Size, Region, and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 3.2
x

Exhibit 3.1

Percentage of All Workers Covered by Their Employers’ Health Benefits, in Firms Both Offering and Not Offering Health Benefits, by Firm Size, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 3.1
x

Exhibit 3.3

Among Workers in Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage of Workers Eligible for Health Benefits Offered by Their Firm, by Firm Characteristics, 2012
2012 EHBS 3.3
x

Exhibit 3.4

Among Workers in Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage of Eligible Workers Who Take Up Health Benefits Offered by Their Firm, by Firm Characteristics, 2012
2012 EHBS 3.4
x

Exhibit 3.5

Among Workers in Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage of Workers Covered by Health Benefits Offered by Their Firm, by Firm Characteristics, 2012
2012 EHBS 3.5
x

Exhibit 3.7

Percentage of Covered Workers in Firms with a Waiting Period for Coverage and Average Waiting Period in Months, by Firm Size, Region, and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 3.7
x

Exhibit 3.8

Distribution of Covered Workers with the Following Waiting Periods for Coverage, 2012
2012 EHBS 3.8
x

Exhibit 3.9

Distribution of Covered Workers Electing Single Coverage, Single Plus One Coverage, or Family Coverage, 2001-2012
2012 EHBS 3.9
x

Exhibit 4.1

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage of Firms That Offer One, Two, or Three or More Plan Types, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 4.1
x

Exhibit 4.2

Percentage of Covered Workers in Firms Offering One, Two, or Three or More Plan Types, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 4.2
x

Exhibit 4.4

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage of Covered Workers in Firms That Offer the Following Plan Types, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 4.4
x

Exhibit 6.1

Average Percentage of Premium Paid by Covered Workers for Single and Family Coverage, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 6.1
x

Exhibit 6.2

Average Monthly Worker Premium Contributions Paid by Covered Workers for Single and Family Coverage, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 6.2
x

Exhibit 6.3

Average Annual Worker and Employer Contributions to Premiums and Total Premiums for Single Coverage, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 6.3
x

Exhibit 6.4

Average Annual Worker and Employer Contributions to Premiums and Total Premiums for Family Coverage, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 6.4
x

Exhibit 6.5

Average Annual Firm and Worker Premium Contributions and Total Premiums for Covered Workers for Single and Family Coverage, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 6.5
x

Exhibit 6.8

Average Annual Worker Premium Contributions Paid by Covered Workers for Single and Family Coverage, by Firm Size, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 6.8
x

Exhibit 6.14

Distribution of Worker Premium Contributions for Single and Family Coverage Relative to the Average Annual Worker Premium Contribution, 2012
2012 EHBS 6.14
x

Exhibit 6.15

Distribution of Percentage of Premium Paid by Covered Workers for Single and Family Coverage, 2002-2012
2012 EHBS 6.15
x

Exhibit 6.17

Distribution of Percentage of Premium Paid by Covered Workers for Family Coverage, by Firm Size, 2002-2012
2012 EHBS 6.17
x

Exhibit 6.16

Distribution of Percentage of Premium Paid by Covered Workers for Single Coverage, by Firm Size, 2002-2012
2012 EHBS 6.16
x

Exhibit 6.20

Average Percentage of Premium Paid by Covered Workers for Family Coverage, by Firm Characteristics and Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 6.20
x

Exhibit 6.25

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits with Fewer Than 20 Employees, Variations in Premiums and Firm Premium Contributions for Single Coverage, 2012
2012 EHBS 6.25
x

Exhibit 6.26

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Vary Worker Premium Contributions by Wage Level, by Firm Size and Region, 2012
2012 EHBS 6.26
x

Exhibit 7.1

Percentage of Covered Workers with No General Annual Health Plan Deductible for Single and Family Coverage, by Plan Type and Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.1
x

Exhibit 7.2

Among Covered Workers with No General Annual Health Plan Deductible for Single and Family Coverage, Percentage Who Have the Following Types of Cost Sharing, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.2
x

Exhibit 7.3

Among Covered Workers with a General Annual Health Plan Deductible for Single Coverage, Average Deductible, by Plan Type and Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.3
x

Exhibit 7.5

Among Covered Workers with a General Annual Health Plan Deductible for Single Coverage, Average Deductible, by Plan Type, 2006- 2012
2012 EHBS 7.5
x

Exhibit 7.11

Distribution of Type of General Annual Deductible for Covered Workers with Family Coverage, by Plan Type and Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.11
x

Exhibit 7.12

Among Covered Workers with a General Annual Health Plan Deductible, Average Deductibles for Family Coverage, by Deductible Type, Plan Type, and Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.12
x

Exhibit 7.13

Among Covered Workers with an Aggregate General Annual Health Plan Deductible for Family Coverage, Average Deductibles, by Plan Type, 2006-2012
2012 EHBS 7.13
x

Exhibit 7.16

Among Covered Workers With a Separate per Person General Annual Health Plan Deductible for Family Coverage, Distribution of Maximum Number of Family Members Required to Meet the Deductible, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.16
x

Exhibit 7.7

Percentage of Covered Workers Enrolled in a Plan with a General Annual Deductible of $1,000 or More for Single Coverage, By Firm Size, 2006-2012
2012 EHBS 7.7
x

Exhibit 7.6

Percentage of Covered Workers Enrolled in a Plan with a High General Annual Deductible for Single Coverage, By Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.6
x

Exhibit 7.18

Among Covered Workers with a General Annual Health Plan Deductible, Percentage with Coverage for the Following Services Without Having to First Meet the Deductible, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.18
x

Exhibit 7.19

Distribution of Covered Workers With Separate Cost Sharing for a Hospital Admission in Addition to Any General Annual Deductible, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.19
x

Exhibit 7.21

Among Covered Workers with Separate Cost Sharing for a Hospital Admission or Outpatient Surgery Episode in Addition to Any General Annual Deductible, Average Cost Sharing, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.21
x

Exhibit 7.20

Distribution of Covered Workers with Separate Cost Sharing for an Outpatient Surgery Episode in Addition to Any General Annual Deductible, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.20
x

Exhibit 7.22

In Addition to Any General Annual Plan Deductible, Percentage of Covered Workers with the Following Types of Cost Sharing for Physician Office Visits and Emergency Room Visits, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.22
x

Exhibit 7.24

Among Covered Workers with Copayments and/or Coinsurance for In-Network Physician Office and Emergency Room Visits, Average Copayments and Coinsurance, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.24
x

Exhibit 7.23

In Addition to Any General Annual Plan Deductible, Percentage of Covered Workers with Emergency Room Cost Sharing, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.23
x

Exhibit 7.29

Percentage of Covered Workers without an Annual Out-of-Pocket Maximum for Single and Family Coverage, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.29
x

Exhibit 7.32

Distribution of Type of Out-of-Pocket Maximum for Covered Workers with Family Coverage, by Plan Type and Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.32
x

Exhibit 7.31

Among Covered Workers with an Out-of-Pocket Maximum for Single Coverage, Distribution of Out-of-Pocket Maximums, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.31
x

Exhibit 7.33

Among Covered Workers with an Aggregate Out-of-Pocket Maximum for Family Coverage, Distribution of Out-of-Pocket Maximums, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.33
x

Exhibit 7.34

Among Covered Workers with a Separate per Person Out-of-Pocket Maximum for Family Coverage, Distribution of Out-of-Pocket Maximums, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.34
x

Exhibit 7.30

Among Covered Workers with an Annual Out-of-Pocket Maximum, Percentage Whose Spending on Various Services Does Not Count Towards the Out-of-Pocket Maximum, by Plan Type, 2012
2012 EHBS 7.30
x

Exhibit 8.1

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Offer an HDHP/HRA and/or an HSA-Qualified HDHP, 2005-2012
2012 EHBS 8.1
x

Exhibit 8.2

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage That Offer an HDHP/SO, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 8.2
x

Exhibit 8.4

Percentage of Covered Workers Enrolled in an HDHP/HRA or HSA-Qualified HDHP, 2006-2012
2012 EHBS 8.4
x

Exhibit 8.5

Percentage of Covered Workers Enrolled in an HDHP/HRA or HSA-Qualified HDHP, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 8.5
x

Exhibit 8.6

HDHP/HRA and HSA-Qualified HDHP Features for Covered Workers, 2012
2012 EHBS 8.6
x

Exhibit 8.8

Distribution of Covered Workers with the Following General Annual Deductible Amounts for Single Coverage, HSA-Qualified HDHPs and HDHP/HRAs, 2012
2012 EHBS 8.8
x

Exhibit 8.10

Distribution of Covered Workers with the Following
2012 EHBS 8.10
x

Exhibit 8.7

Average Annual Premiums and Contributions to Savings Accounts for Covered Workers in HDHP/HRAs or HSA-Qualified HDHPs, Compared to All Non-HDHP/SO Plans, 2012
2012 EHBS 8.7
x

Exhibit 8.13

Distribution of Covered Workers with the Following
2012 EHBS 8.13
x

Exhibit 8.14

Distribution of Covered Workers with the Following Annual Employer Contributions to their HRA or HSA, for Family Coverage, 2012
2012 EHBS 8.14
x

Exhibit 10.1

Percentage of Covered Workers in Partially or Completely Self-Funded Plans, by Firm Size, 1999-2012
2012 EHBS 10.1
x

Exhibit 10.4

Percentage of Covered Workers in Partially or Completely Self-Funded Plans, by Plan Type and Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 10.4
x

Exhibit 10.3

Percentage of Covered Workers in Partially or Completely Self-Funded Plans, by Firm Size, Region, and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 10.3
x

Exhibit 10.9

Percentage of Covered Workers Enrolled in a Partially or Completely Self-Funded Plan Covered by Stoploss Insurance, by Firm Size, Region, and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 10.9
x

Exhibit 10.10

Prevalence and Average Attachment Points of Stoploss Insurance, by Firm Size and Region, 2012
2012 EHBS 10.10
x

Exhibit 12.1

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage Offering a Particular Wellness Program to Their Employees, by Firm Size, Region, and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.1
x

Exhibit 12.2

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage Offering a Particular Wellness Program to Their Employees, by Firm Size, Region, and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.2
x

Exhibit 12.3

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage Offering a Particular Wellness Program to Their Employees, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.3
x

Exhibit 12.4

Among Firms Offering Health and Wellness Benefits, Percentage of Firms with the Following Features of Wellness Benefits, by Firm Size and Region, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.4
x

Exhibit 12.5

Among Firms Offering Health and Wellness Benefits, Percentage of Firms That Offer Specific Incentives to Employees Who Participate in Wellness Programs, by Firm Size and Region, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.5
x

Exhibit 12.6

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits and Wellness Programs, Percentage That Use Specific Methods to Identify Individuals and Encourage Participation in Wellness Programs, by Firm Size and Region, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.6
x

Exhibit 12.7

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits and Wellness Programs, Percentage of Firms Reporting the Following as the Firm’s Primary Reason for Offering Wellness Programs, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.7
x

Exhibit 12.9

Among Firms Offering Wellness Programs and a HDHP/SO, Percentage of Firms That Said the Decision to Offer Wellness Programs was Related to the Decision to Offer a High Deductible Health Plan, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.9
x

Exhibit 12.8

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits and Wellness Programs, Percentage of Firms That Think Offering Wellness Programs is Effective at Improving Health or Reducing Costs, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.8
x

Exhibit 12.10

Among Firms Offering Health Benefits, Percentage of Firms That Offer Employees Health Risk Assessments, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 12.10
x

Exhibit 13.1

Percentage of Firms with At Least One Plan Grandfathered under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), by Size, Region and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 13.1
x

Exhibit 13.3

Percentage of Covered Workers Enrolled in Plans Grandfathered under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), by Firm Size, 2011 and 2012
2012 EHBS 13.3
x

Exhibit 13.4

Among Covered Workers in a Non-Grandfathered Health Plan, Reasons Why Plan is Not a Grandfathered Health Plan, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 13.4
x

Exhibit 13.5

Percentage of Firms Offering Family Coverage That Enrolled Adult Dependents up to 26 Years of Age Because of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), by Size, Region, and Industry, 2012
2012 EHBS 13.5
x

Exhibit 13.6

Among Firms That Enrolled Adult Dependents Due to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the Average Number of Adult Dependents Enrolled, by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 13.6
x

Exhibit 13.7

Among Covered Workers, Changes to Cost Sharing for and Type of Preventive Services Because of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), by Firm Size, 2012
2012 EHBS 13.7