In 1999, The Kaiser Family Foundation, the Health Research and Educational Trust, and UC Berkeley undertook a supplement to the National Employer Health Benefits Survey based on California firms. Since that time, the survey has been conducted annually by Kaiser and HRET. Like the National survey, the California Employer Health…
- state & global data
- view as grid
- view as list
Family Health Premiums Rise 3 Percent to $13,770 in 2010, But Workers’ Share Jumps 14 Percent as Firms Shift Cost Burden
About One In Four Covered Workers Now Face Annual Deductibles Of $1,000 Or More, Including Nearly Half Of Those Employed By Small Businesses WASHINGTON, D.C. — Workers on average are paying nearly $4,000 this year toward the cost of family health coverage – an increase of 14 percent, or $482,…
This testimony by the Foundation’s Karen Pollitz before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission included background on wellness programs, wellness incentives and nondiscrimination since 1996, and questions and issues related to proposed regulations governing the design and application of wellness programs offered in conjunction with employer-sponsored group health plans.
This issue brief reviews recent trends and developments in employer-sponsored retiree health coverage and examines the impact of recent legislation, such as the Medicare drug benefit and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on retiree health coverage. The report describes leading strategies employers have been pursuing or considering to limit costs for retiree health benefits. In addition, the report considers the potential implications of proposals aimed at reducing federal spending for retiree health coverage and costs.
As many employers begin to expand their wellness programs under new guidelines set forth by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll finds workers oppose programs that make them pay higher premiums if they fail to participate or meet specific health goals. Overall public opinion of the ACA remains about the same as it has for the last several months, with a somewhat higher share of the public continuing to express an unfavorable view of the law (45%) than a favorable one (39%).
On March 25th, the Supreme Court will hear two cases brought by for-profit corporations challenging the ACA’s contraceptive coverage rule on religious grounds. These two corporations are Hobby Lobby, a national chain of craft stores owned by a Christian family and Conestoga Wood Specialties, a cabinet manufacturer, owned by a Mennonite family. Beyond the impact on the ACA and contraceptive coverage, the Court’s decision may have implications for religious rights of employers and employees, as well as corporate and civil rights laws. This brief examines three fundamental questions raised by some of the 84 amicus briefs that have been submitted to the Court.
The Supreme Court is expected to reach a decision by the end of June, 2014 on the cases brought forth by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, two for profit corporations challenging the ACA’s contraceptive coverage requirement. The plaintiffs contend that the requirement that they include coverage for certain contraceptive services (emergency contraceptive pills and intrauterine devices) in the insurance plans “substantially burdens” both the corporation’s and the owners’ religious rights. During the arguments, several of the justices discussed the extent to which the corporations did or not did not have a choice in offering coverage to their workers. In this brief, we explore some of the factors influencing coverage decisions and possible consequences for women and employers given possible Supreme Court decision options: either upholding the contraceptive coverage requirement, or in favor of Hobby Lobby.
Data Note: Differences In Public Opinion On The ACA’s Contraceptive Coverage Requirement, By Gender, Religion, And Political Party
One of the most politically polarizing elements of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is the law’s requirement that new private health insurance plans cover prescription contraceptives and services, including all methods approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The rule currently provides an exemption for houses of worship and an…
Issue Brief Explores Consequences of Potential Supreme Court Decisions on the ACA Contraceptive Coverage Requirement
A new Kaiser Family Foundation issue brief explores some of the factors influencing employers’ coverage decisions and possible consequences for employers and workers that could arise from possible Supreme Court decisions in the cases brought by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, for-profit corporations challenging the Affordable Care Act’s requirement…
The Uninsured: A Primer presents basic information about health coverage and the uninsured population leading up to and after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act–who the uninsured are and why they do not have health coverage, and the impact lack of insurance can have on health outcomes and personal finances.