The Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) was established in 1997 to provide coverage for uninsured children who are low-income but above the threshold for Medicaid eligibility. In 2009, and again in the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Congress extended federal funding for CHIP, but funding will expire a little over a year from now. Decisions about CHIP’s future funding will be consequential as more than 8 million low-income children were covered by CHIP at some point during 2012. To help inform the policy debate about CHIP, this brief reviews key data and evidence from the large body of research on the impact of children’s coverage.
- state & global data
- view as grid
- view as list
This brief provides an overview of children’s coverage leading up to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), a review of changes for children included in the ACA, and a look at issues leading up to the reauthorization of the CHIP program.
Web Briefing: Modern Era Medicaid and CHIP – Findings from a 50-State Survey of Eligibility, Enrollment, Renewal, and Cost-Sharing Policies
The Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured (KCMU) hosts a web briefing to present findings from our 13th annual 50-state survey of Medicaid and CHIP eligibility, enrollment, renewal, and cost-sharing policies. The survey provides a profile of where states stand as of January 2015, one year into the implementation of the major Medicaid provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Submitted testimony of Diane Rowland, executive director of the Commission, about health insurance options for unemployed workers. She was scheduled to testify to the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, but the hearing was postponed.
With Congress poised to reauthorize the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) with a substantial increase in its federal funding, there are potentially new opportunities for reducing the estimated 9 million uninsured children nationwide. At the same time, the nation’s weak economy and growing unemployment is resulting in fewer families…
This annual 50-state survey finds that number of people on Medicaid and state spending on the program are climbing sharply as a result of the recession, straining state budgets and pressuring officials to curb costs despite increased financial help from the federal government through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act…
A Historical Review of How States Have Responded to the Availability of Federal Funds for Health Coverage
This historical review finds that the availability of federal funds has served as an effective incentive for states to provide health coverage to meet the health and long-term care needs of their low-income residents despite state budget pressures. The brief examines the history of earlier experiences and provides important context for how states may respond as they weigh the costs and benefits of expanding their Medicaid programs in 2014 as called for under the Affordable Care Act.
Modern Era Medicaid: Findings from a 50-State Survey of Eligibility, Enrollment, Renewal, and Cost-Sharing Policies in Medicaid and CHIP as of January 2015
This 13th annual 50-state survey of Medicaid and CHIP eligibility, enrollment, renewal, and cost-sharing policies as of January 2015 provides a snapshot of state Medicaid and CHIP policies in place one year into the post-ACA era.
With some states grappling over whether to expand Medicaid, and Congress facing big decisions about the future of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), this briefing reviewed the basics about both programs, and discuss current issues. Co-hosted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Alliance for Health Reform, KFF’s Diane Rowland and Ed Howard of the Alliance moderated the discussion.
On Friday, March 6, 2014, the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Alliance for Health Reform hosted an ACA 101 briefing on the Affordable Care Act. The briefing took place just as the second marketplace enrollment period ended, and the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case challenging the ACA’s subsidies (King v Burwell).