Medicare Advantage: A Powerful Tool for Aging in Place (Just in Time for Open Enrollment!)

As families plan for aging in place, maintaining independence at home rather than moving to a nursing home or assisted living facility is key. Medicare plays a pivotal role in either facilitating or frustrating aging in place plans. Original Medicare (Parts A and B) offers limited support for home-based care, but Medicare Advantage (MA) plans (Part C), offered by private insurers, significantly enhance options for home care, telehealth, and post-hospital recovery. These plans not only cover everything Original Medicare does but also provide supplemental benefits tailored to aging in place, often improving health outcomes and reducing costs. With Open Enrollment (October 15–December 7) approaching, understanding MA’s advantages is critical for  families committed to staying home.

Why Medicare Advantage for Aging in Place?

Aging in place involves services like home care (e.g., help with bathing, meal prep), short-term disability support (e.g., recovery from surgery), and long-term care (e.g., chronic condition management). Original Medicare covers short-term skilled home health care (nursing, therapy) if you’re homebound and a doctor certifies medical necessity, but it excludes ongoing custodial care, short-term disability income, and most non-skilled home care. Moreover, original Medicare incentivized institutional care by paying for institutional rehabilitation for a period of time following a three-day hospitalization. MA plans bridge these gaps with flexible, home-focused benefits, often reducing out-of-pocket costs and supporting independence.

Recent data underscores MA’s impact: studies show MA enrollees have lower hospital readmission rates compared to Original Medicare (even with shorter periods necessary for rehabilitation), thanks to enhanced care coordination and home-based services. For aging-in-place families, this translates to fewer disruptions and better recovery at home.

Key Medicare Advantage Benefits Over Original Medicare

Here’s how MA plans enhance aging-in-place elements, with specific advantages in telehealth, hospital-at-home programs, in-home physical/occupational therapy (PT/OT), and transitions from hospital to long-term care, plus other post-hospitalization perks:

●Home Care (e.g., aides, meal prep):

• Original Medicare Coverage (2025): Limited to skilled care (nursing, therapy) if homebound; no custodial care (e.g., bathing). 

• MA Advantages: MA plans can pay for help that isn’t strictly medical, unlike Original Medicare. This includes: aides (someone to assist with daily tasks like bathing or dressing), for about 20–40 hours per month (e.g., a few hours a week); meal delivery services that bring prepared meals to your home, helping if cooking is hard; and, home modifications like grab bars in the bathroom to make your home safer and easier to navigate.  These are typically limited to in-network providers (out of network may not be covered or might cost you) and prior authorization is often required. 

• Potential Cost Savings & Health Outcomes: Potentially saves $200–$500/month on meals or $4,000–$6,000/month on aides; reduces nursing home risk (average cost: $100,000+/year).

●Short-Term Disability (e.g., post-surgery): 

• Original Medicare Coverage (2025):  Up to 100 days skilled nursing/home health; 20% coinsurance after day 20 ($204/day in 2024) possibly covered by supplemental insurance.

• Medicare Advantage Advantages: Lower copays, durable equipment (walkers), temporary aides. Expenses typically counts toward out-of-pocket max ($3,000–$8,000/year).

• Potential Cost Savings & Health Outcomes: Caps costs vs. Original Medicare's unlimited coinsurance; 10–15% fewer ER visits due to better recovery support.

●Long-Term Care (e.g., chronic conditions): 

• Original Medicare Coverage (2025):  No custodial care; limited chronic management.

• MA Advantages:  Partial non-skilled care like bathing, dressing, or eating, which don’t require a nurse or doctor (unlike "skilled" care like wound treatment). Medicare Advantage (MA) plans may cover some of these non-skilled services for a limited number of hours (e.g., 20–40 hours per month) to help you stay at home. Original Medicare doesn’t cover this kind of help at all unless you’re homebound and need skilled care too.  Chronic Special Needs Plans (C-SNPs) are special types of MA plans designed for people with ongoing health conditions like diabetes, heart failure, or lung disease (COPD). These plans often include extra benefits like devices or services that check your health at home (e.g., blood sugar monitors or telehealth check-ins with a nurse). This helps you manage your condition without frequent hospital visits.  Pair with Medicaid/insurance for full coverage.

• Potential Cost Savings & Health Outcomes:  Offsets 10–20% costs ($100–$300/month); C-SNPs cut hospitalizations by 10–15%.

●Telehealth: 

• Original Medicare Coverage (2025):  Covers office visits, mental health via video/audio; home-based until Sept. 30, 2025, then rural-only for non-mental health. 20% coinsurance.
• MA Advantages:  With MA plans, you can use telehealth (like video or phone calls with doctors) from your home at any time, regardless of where you live (urban or rural); original Medicare, however, may limit home-based telehealth after September 30, 2025, to rural areas for most non-mental health services, requiring you to visit a clinic or hospital for telehealth in urban areas. MA plans often allow telehealth visits using just a phone call (no video needed), which is great if you don’t have a smartphone or reliable internet. Original Medicare covers audio-only for mental health and some services through September 2025, but MA plans may extend this option for more types of visits (like routine check-ups) even after that date. 

MA plans also cover a wider range of telehealth services than Original Medicare. Beyond standard doctor visits or mental health sessions, MA might include quick check-ins with nurses, medication reviews, or chronic condition management (e.g., diabetes monitoring). MA plans may cover telehealth for routine check-ins, follow-ups after hospitalization, chronic disease management (e.g., COPD or diabetes), and even physical/occupational therapy (PT/OT) guidance. Original Medicare sticks to a narrower list, like office visits and mental health. For example, an MA plan might let a nurse call to check your blood pressure readings, reducing the need for in-person visits.

These extra services help keep you healthy at home without frequent in-person visits.

• Potential Cost Savings & Health Outcomes:  Improves access (43% fewer missed follow-ups); vital for rural Ohioans post-Sept. 2025.  MA plans often have $0–$20 copays for telehealth, compared to Original Medicare’s 20% coinsurance (e.g., $50 for a $250 specialist visit). Some plans waive copays entirely for telehealth to encourage use. Telehealth counseling, often expanded in MA, improves post-hospital recovery by addressing depression, common in 20% of elderly post-discharge.

●Hospital at Home: 

• Original Medicare Coverage (2025):  No dedicated program; skilled home health only if homebound.

• MA Advantages: Covers acute care at home (IV meds, monitoring) as inpatient alternative. 

• Potential Cost Savings & Health Outcomes: Reduces readmissions by 20–30% in pilots; lowers infection risk vs. hospitals.

●In-Home Physical/Occupational Therapy (PT/OT): 

• Original Medicare Coverage (2025):  Covers if medically necessary (no cap, $2,410 threshold); 20% coinsurance.  Medicare will pay for in-home PT (to improve movement, strength, or balance) or OT (to help with daily tasks like dressing or cooking) only if a doctor says it’s needed for your health. For example, you might need PT after a hip replacement to regain mobility or OT after a stroke to relearn daily activities. For in-home coverage under Part A (home health benefit), you must be homebound (hard to leave home without help) and need skilled care (like therapy from a licensed professional). A doctor must certify this. If you’re not homebound, Part B may cover PT/OT as outpatient services, even at home, as long as it’s medically necessary.  

In 2025, Medicare starts paying closer attention once your PT or OT costs hit $2,410 per year (this applies to PT and speech therapy combined, or OT separately). After this threshold, providers must add a special code (KX modifier) to your claims to confirm the therapy is still needed. Medicare usually keeps paying if justified, but it’s a checkpoint to ensure necessity.

You pay 20% of the cost for each PT/OT session, and Medicare covers the other 80%. For example, if a session costs $100, you pay $20 out of pocket. This applies after you meet the Part B deductible ($257 in 2025). If you’re getting in-home care under Part A’s home health benefit (and you’re homebound), there’s no coinsurance for those services. 

• Medicare Advantage Advantages: Lower copays ($20–$50), extended sessions, non-homebound access. MA plans often reduce the 20% coinsurance to a fixed copay (e.g., $20–$50 per session) or waive it entirely, saving you money compared to Original Medicare’s uncapped 20%.  Some MA plans cover in-home PT/OT even if you’re not strictly homebound, making it easier to get therapy at home for aging in place. MA plans may also include virtual PT/OT (via telehealth) or home safety modifications (like ramps) to complement therapy, boosting recovery compared to Original Medicare.

• Potential Cost Savings & Health Outcomes: Unlike Original Medicare, MA plans have an annual out-of-pocket maximum ($3,000–$8,000 in 2025), so your PT/OT costs won’t spiral indefinitely. MA’s coordinated care (e.g., therapy paired with nurse check-ins) reduces hospital readmissions, as therapy continuity prevents setbacks like falls (5–8% of readmissions).

●Hospital-to-LTC Transition (MMI): 

• Original Medicare Coverage (2025): Medicare only pays for skilled care if it’s helping you get better or maintain your abilities. If your doctor decides you’ve reached a point where more care won’t improve your condition (called “maximum medical improvement”), Medicare stops covering it. For example, if you’re recovering from a stroke but can’t make more progress with therapy, Medicare will say the skilled care isn’t needed anymore, even if you still need help or assistance, even if needed on a daily basis throughout the day. Skilled care means specialized care from trained professionals, like nurses giving injections or physical therapists helping you regain strength after surgery. It’s different from everyday help (like bathing or cooking), which can be provided by non-professionals like family, and for which Medicare doesn’t cover.  

If you’re in a skilled nursing facility (like a rehab center after a hospital stay), Medicare Part A covers up to 100 days per “benefit period” (a specific time frame tied to your condition). But this coverage stops earlier if your condition isn’t improving. For the first 20 days, Medicare pays 100%; for days 21–100, you pay a daily copay (about $204 in 2024). If you hit 100 days or stop improving before that, Medicare stops paying, and you’d need to cover the full cost (often $300–$500/day) or find other help, like Medicaid.

• Medicare Advantage Advantages:  Flexible prior authorization, extended SNF days, care managers for transitions.  MA plans offer advantages over Original Medicare for managing care, particularly when moving from a hospital to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) or home. It’s about making transitions smoother and potentially extending coverage for certain services.

Prior authorization is when your MA plan needs to approve certain services (like therapy or nursing home stays) before they’re covered. Unlike Original Medicare, which has strict rules about when care is “medically necessary,” MA plans can be more flexible in approving these services. For example, they might okay extra therapy sessions or specialized care if it helps you stay out of the hospital, even if Original Medicare would deny it. Extra days can give you more time to recover without paying huge out-of-pocket costs (SNFs can cost $300–$500/day without coverage). This supports aging in place by helping you return home stronger.

MA plans often assign a care manager (like a nurse or social worker) to guide you through transitions in care, like when moving from a hospital to an SNF, home, or another care setting. They help coordinate things like therapy schedules, medication plans, or follow-up doctor visits. They also make sure everyone (doctors, therapists, family) is on the same page.  These managers reduce confusion and mistakes (like wrong medications), making your move from hospital to home smoother and safer. This can prevent you from going back to the hospital.

• Potential Cost Savings & Health Outcomes:  Flexible Prior Authorization  means you might get extra PT/OT at home to avoid a nursing home,  reducing reliance on institutional care.  MA care managers reduce hospital readmissions by significantly by ensuring proper medication and follow-up care (e.g., >15% fewer heart failure readmissions with MA coordination).  By way of illustration, a care manager might arrange telehealth check-ins or home PT to keep you stable after leaving an SNF, cutting risks like medication errors (reducing hospital readmissions).

●Utilization of Technology: Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) and More: 

• RPM Defined: RPM uses devices like blood pressure cuffs, glucose monitors, or wearable heart rate trackers that send data to your doctor from home. MA plans, particularly Chronic Special Needs Plans (C-SNPs), often cover these for conditions like diabetes, heart failure, or COPD.

• Original Medicare Coverage (2025): Limited RPM coverage (only specific codes like 99453–99457 for chronic conditions).

• Medicare Advantage Advantages:   Unlike Original Medicare, which has limited RPM coverage, MA plans may include RPM as a supplemental benefit, covering device costs or monitoring services. For example, a 2025 Humana MA plan in Ohio offered free glucose monitors and monthly nurse check-ins for diabetic patients.

• Potential Cost Savings & Health Outcomes: RPM significantly reduces ER visits  by catching issues early (e.g., high blood sugar spikes). A 2024 study showed MA’s RPM programs improved blood pressure control in 60% of hypertensive patients within 6 months.  For example, If you have heart failure, an MA plan might provide a scale to monitor weight daily (fluid retention is a red flag). Data goes to your doctor, who can adjust meds via telehealth, preventing hospital trips.

• Other Technologies: 

• Smart Home Devices: Some MA plans cover or subsidize devices like motion-sensor lights or fall detection systems (e.g., integrated with Alexa or Apple Watch) as part of home safety benefits. These reduce fall risks, a leading cause of readmissions (5–8% of elderly cases).

• Health Apps and Portals: MA plans often provide apps for scheduling telehealth, tracking vitals, or accessing care coordinators. For instance, UnitedHealthcare’s 2025 MA plans include a portal for real-time medication reminders, boosting adherence significantly.

• Virtual PT/OT: Some MA plans offer virtual physical or occupational therapy sessions, guiding exercises via video to maintain mobility after in-person sessions end. This is rare in Original Medicare.

MA plans don’t cover all non-skilled care needs, especially if you need help 24/7. To fill this gap, you can combine MA with Medicaid (a state program for low-income people), private long-term care insurance, or spend-down of your personal assets and property. For example, Ohio’s PASSPORT program (through Medicaid) can cover more in-home aide hours if you qualify (income under $2,901/month in 2025). Private insurance can also help pay for ongoing care costs that MA doesn’t fully cover.

Moreover, some plans present challenges that only a Medicare Specialist would know.  It is imperative that, in addition to conducting your own investigation, you consult with a Specialist who can guide you based on "inside" information that might be unavailable to you, or at least hard to access and assess.

In short,  MA plans can give you some help with daily tasks and tools to monitor chronic illnesses at home, but they too are limited. To get full support for staying at home long-term, you’ll likely need to add Medicaid, private insurance, or asset spend-down to cover the rest.  If you select the latter, your assets will last longer, leaving a greater chance that assets will pass to heirs rather than being consumed by long=term care expenses. 

Additional MA Benefits for Post-Hospital Recovery

When Original Medicare’s benefits cease (e.g., after 100 skilled nursing days or when PT/OT no longer shows “progress”), MA plans offer unique supports to maintain health and prevent setbacks:

• Care Coordination: Dedicated managers ensure medication reconciliation and follow-ups, reducing readmissions by 8–20%. For example, a 2025 study by Providence VNA Home Health showed medication reconciliation cut 30-day hospitalizations from 12% to 9% for heart failure patients.

• Supplemental Benefits: Meal delivery, transportation, or flex cards ($50–$300/year for OTC items) support nutrition and mobility, reducing malnutrition-related readmissions.

• Behavioral Health: Expanded telehealth counseling addresses post-hospital depression, improving physical recovery by 10–15%.

• Out-of-Pocket Caps: MA caps annual costs ($3,000–$8,000), unlike Original Medicare’s unlimited costs, ensuring affordability for ongoing care.

Ohio Context: Why MA Matters Now

Recent Ohio developments, like the September 2, 2025, Ohio Supreme Court ruling previously discussed on this blog, (State ex rel. LeadingAge Ohio v. Ohio Dept. of Medicaid), highlight Medicaid funding shortfalls for nursing homes ($527 million in 2024-2025), threatening care quality for 66,000 residents. MA’s home-based benefits offer a buffer, reducing reliance on facilities and aligning with programs like Ohio’s PASSPORT waiver, which supports in-home aides for those with income under $2,901/month.

Steps to Leverage MA for Aging in Place

Assess Needs: Consult a doctor or geriatric care manager to outline required services (e.g., PT/OT, home mods).

Compare Plans: Use Medicare.gov’s Plan Finder to identify plans with telehealth, in-home care, or C-SNPs. Prioritize low out-of-pocket maximums and strong Ohio networks.

Speak with a Specialist: A Medicare specialist is a must, not only to access your needs and goals, but to advise regarding which plans are best, and which specific plan is best for you and your circumstances.  

Enroll Strategically: Switch during Open Enrollment (October 15–December 7). Check for Special Needs Plans for chronic conditions.

Maximize Benefits: Request prior authorization early; combine with Veterans benefits, Area Agencies on Aging, or long-term care insurance. Track annual allowances.

Plan for Gaps: Budget for premiums ($0–$200/month) and copays; use trusts (e.g., $154,140 Community Spouse Resource Allowance in 2025) or Medicaid planning to cover full custodial care.

Monitor Health: Use MA’s telehealth and care coordination to prevent setbacks, leveraging data like 43% fewer missed follow-ups.

A Call to Action

Medicare Advantage plans empower Ohio families to age in place with dignity, offering cost savings, flexible care, and better health outcomes, like  fewer readmissions and !improved recovery. Amid uncertainties like Ohio’s Medicaid disputes, MA’s home-focused benefits are a lifeline. Don’t wait!  For tailored strategies, consult an elder law attorney or your State Health Insurance Assistance Program (SHIP). Secure your aging-in-place plan now to avoid facility costs and thrive at home.

Is Medicare Advantage Plan Popularity "Coerced?" The Conversation.

The growth of Medicare Advantage (MA) plans over the past 15 years- reaching 54% of Medicare beneficiaries by 2024, or roughly 33 million enrollees, is generally attributed to a combination of policy changes, market dynamics, and genuine appeal to beneficiaries. I, for one, have evolved in my thinking regarding these alternatives to traditional Medicare, initially preferring traditional Medicare, but now actively encouraging clients to explore the MA option, particularly to facilitate aging in place planning. For example, see the following articles:

• Aging in Place: New CMS Policies are Changing the Way Investors View Home Health
• 2019 Medicare Advantage Plans Incorporate Long Term Care, Aging in Place Benefits

A recent article, however, suggests that MA plans are popular because they are compelled or coerced, and the rising number of subscribers doesn't reflect a real "preference." "Medicare Advantage is covering more and more Americans − some because they don’t get to choose," published on The Conversation on April 3, 2025, by Grace McCormack and Victoria Shier, presents a critical perspective on the rapid expansion of Medicare Advantage (MA) plans in the United States. While it raises valid concerns about privatization trends, cost to taxpayers, and limited choice for some beneficiaries, the piece has several shortcomings in its analysis, including a lack of consideration and analysis of counterarguments, an overemphasis on negative framing, and insufficient exploration of the broader context driving MA’s growth. What follows are my thoughts.

The article’s central thesis is that MA’s growth is driven by a lack of choice, particularly for retirees whose employers or state governments limit subsidies to MA plans, effectively "forcing" them into privatization. While this is a legitimate point, supported by the claim that 13 states and over half of large private employers offering MA do not subsidize traditional Medicare supplements, I think it oversimplifies the decision-making process for beneficiaries. The authors imply a coercive dynamic, but fail to adequately explore why employers and states have shifted toward MA in the first place.

For instance, they do not discuss the financial incentives for employers, such as lower administrative costs or the ability to offload retiree healthcare liabilities onto private insurers, which MA plans often market as a benefit. Nor do they consider that some beneficiaries might prefer MA’s bundled coverage (e.g., vision, dental, and hearing benefits) over traditional Medicare, even if choice is constrained.

Moreover, the article does not quantify how many individuals are truly "forced" into MA versus those who opt in voluntarily after weighing options. The statistic that 54% of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in MA (up from 8 million to 33 million between 2007 and 2024) is striking, but it conflates voluntary and involuntary enrollment without breaking down the proportions. This lack of granularity weakens the claim that lack of choice is a primary driver, as it could equally reflect MA’s appeal to a broad population.

The article highlights that switching from MA back to traditional Medicare is "often difficult," citing the loss of guaranteed-issue rights for Medigap plans after the initial enrollment period. This is technically accurate- outside of four states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and New York), Medigap insurers can deny coverage or charge higher premiums based on preexisting conditions if beneficiaries leave MA after their first year. The authors do not explore the extent to which this locks people in practice, however, ignoring the initial opportunity to abandon the MA plan, and/or the opportunity a younger retiring spouse has to consider the first retiring spouse's choice and experience. For example, they do not provide data on how many MA enrollees attempt to switch and are denied Medigap, nor do they discuss the role of Special Enrollment Periods or protections for those whose MA plans are discontinued (e.g., the 63-day guaranteed-issue window mentioned in related sources).

My personal experience in planning suggests that the most of these seemingly compelled choices involve the second retiring spouse, often the wife, who has had the benefit of experience with traditional Medicare. I find that they often welcome the opportunity abandon Medicare. I wondered how accurate my experience might be, and was surprised to learn that women make up roughly 75% of public school teachers and 80% of nurses, both significant state employee groups in many states. Women have historically been well-represented in public sector jobs, particularly in fields like education and health services, which dominate state budgets. My experience might be an accurate reflection of what other planners experience.

The article's framing suggests the existence of a "trap" without acknowledging that many beneficiaries may not want to switch, either because they are satisfied with MA or because traditional Medicare’s uncapped out-of-pocket costs (absent Medigap) are less appealing. The article could have strengthened its argument by delving into beneficiary satisfaction rates or real-world examples of switching difficulties, rather than leaving the claim as a broad assertion, but I assume the former statistics, particularly, don't support the argument.

The authors draw a parallel between MA’s growth and the privatization of Medicaid, noting that 74% of Medicaid beneficiaries are in private plans, often without choice. This comparison is intriguing but underdeveloped. Medicare and Medicaid serve different populations with distinct needs: Medicare’s is older, often healthier enrollees versus Medicaid’s low-income, higher-needs population, and the dynamics of privatization differ significantly. The article does not explain why MA’s privatization mirrors Medicaid’s beyond the lack-of-choice angle, nor does it address the historical policy decisions (e.g., the 2003 Medicare Modernization Act) that incentivized MA’s expansion through higher payments and marketing flexibility.

Furthermore, the authors gloss over the political and economic forces behind MA’s rise, such as lobbying by insurance companies or bipartisan support for market-based solutions in healthcare. Without this context, the critique feels surface-level, attributing MA’s dominance to employer decisions and beneficiary inertia rather than a deliberate systemic shift.

The article relies heavily on enrollment trends (e.g., the quadrupling of MA enrollment since the mid-2000s) and broad statements about employer practices, but it lacks specific, compelling evidence to support its more critical claims. For instance, the assertion that "more patients can be denied doctor-ordered care" in MA plans alludes to prior authorization requirements but offers no statistics on denial rates or their impact on health outcomes compared to traditional Medicare.

The article focuses almost exclusively on systemic downsides—cost, coercion, and care denials—while giving short shrift to why MA might appeal to beneficiaries beyond "lower premiums and co-pays and the promise of extra benefits." Surveys, such as those from the Commonwealth Fund, show that MA enrollees often report high satisfaction with care coordination and supplemental benefits like dental and vision coverage, which traditional Medicare lacks. The authors mention these attractions briefly but dismiss them as bait without exploring whether they deliver value for some enrollees. This omission creates a lopsided critique that paints MA as a net negative, ignoring the possibility that its growth reflects genuine demand rather than just manipulation or lack of choice.

The authors assert that MA "burdens taxpayers" by costing more per enrollee than traditional Medicare, a point often echoed in critiques of privatization. They cite the growth in enrollment as increasing this burden but provide no specific figures in the article to substantiate the scale of the overpayment (though related literature, such as from The Conversation’s other pieces, suggests an additional $83 billion annually). While this is a valid concern, studies like those from MedPAC have shown MA plans receive higher risk-adjusted payments due to upcoding of diagnoses—the article does not engage with counterarguments that MA plans might reduce certain costs, such as through preventive care or reduced hospital readmissions, which some research suggests they achieve more effectively than traditional Medicare.

Additionally, the piece does not compare the total cost of traditional Medicare (including supplemental Medigap plans and Part D drug coverage, which beneficiaries often purchase separately) to MA’s all-in-one model. For many beneficiaries, the out-of-pocket savings from MA’s lower premiums and cost-sharing could offset taxpayer overpayments in practical terms, a trade-off the article ignores. By framing MA solely as a taxpayer burden, presents a one-sided narrative that overlooks potential efficiencies or benefits that might justify its higher upfront costs.

Finally, the article raises concerns about MA’s dominance but stops short of proposing solutions or grappling with the feasibility of reversing the trend. If MA’s growth is problematic, what alternatives exist? Should policymakers cap enrollment, reform payment structures, or expand traditional Medicare’s benefits to compete? The authors call for understanding "why Medicare Advantage has become so popular," yet they do not venture into this territory themselves, leaving the critique incomplete. Without engaging with potential reforms, the piece risks being a lament rather than a constructive analysis.

The article effectively and undeniably highlights real issues with Medicare Advantage, its cost to taxpayers, the constraints it imposes on some beneficiaries, and the challenges of switching back to traditional Medicare. By framing MA’s rise as largely a product of coercion and inefficiency, it overlooks the complex interplay of beneficiary preferences, market dynamics, and policy design that have fueled its growth. A more balanced and thorough critique would have integrated these factors, provided richer data, and offered a path forward, rather than leaving readers with a one-dimensional warning about "privatization’s" perils.

Medicare Advantage Premiums Decline to Lowest in 13 Years With Open Enrollment Approaching

Medicare Open Enrollment begins on October 15, 2019, and ends on December 7, 2019.  Ahead of Medicare Open Enrollment, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), announced that, on average, Medicare Advantage premiums in 2020 are expected to decline 23 percent from 2018, while plan choices, benefits and enrollment continue to increase. The Medicare Advantage average monthly premium will be the lowest in the last thirteen years for the more than 24 million people with Medicare who are projected to enroll in a Medicare Advantage plan for 2020.

HHS Secretary Alex Azar described the changes as providing “lower costs, more options, and benefits tailored to patients’ needs." 

This news comes as the agency releases the benefit and cost-sharing information for Medicare Advantage and Part D prescription drug plans for the 2020 calendar year. Specific highlights include:

• The Medicare Advantage average monthly plan premium is expected to decrease 14 percent to $23.00 (estimated) in 2020 from an average of $26.87 in 2019. Since 2017, the average monthly Medicare Advantage premium has decreased by an estimated 27.9 percent. This is the lowest that the average monthly premium for a Medicare Advantage plan has been since 2007.
• Beneficiaries will have more plan choices, with about 1,200 more Medicare Advantage plans operating in 2020 than in 2018.
• The average number of Medicare Advantage plan choices per county will increase from about 33 plans in 2019 to 39 plans in 2020. This represents an increase of 49 percent since 2017.
• Medicare Advantage continues to be popular, with enrollment projected to increase to an all-time high of 24.4 million beneficiaries from the current enrollment of 22.2 million, out of approximately 60 million people currently enrolled in Medicare. Enrollment in Medicare Advantage in 2020 is expected to have increased by 30.6 percent since 2017.
• Coupled with the previously announced 13.5 percent decline in the average monthly basic Part D premium, beneficiaries have saved about $2.65 billion in Medicare Advantage and Part D premium costs since 2017. The projected average monthly basic Part D premium of $30 in 2020 is the lowest the Part D basic premium has been since 2013.
• The continued decline in Medicare Advantage and Part D premiums over the past three years is estimated to save taxpayers nearly $6 billion in the form of lower Medicare premium subsidies.

CMS has, according to these recent announcements, " taken several actions over the last two years to protect and strengthen the Medicare Advantage and Part D programs, driving competition and lowering costs," including:

• Providing beneficiaries with more choices due to CMS removing limits requiring meaningful differences among a Medicare Advantage Organization’s plans beginning in 2019.
• Reducing burden for Medicare Advantage and Part D plans through streamlining government review and approval of marketing materials.
• Expanding access to reduced cost sharing and additional benefits for enrollees with certain conditions, such diabetes and congestive heart failure, due to the agency’s reinterpretation of uniformity in 2018. About 300 plans in 2020 will offer up to 1.3 million Medicare Advantage enrollees with access to such benefits.
• Expanding opportunities for seniors to choose Medicare Advantage plans that are providing new supplemental benefits, or extra benefits, that are tailored to their specific needs to help them maintain their health. In 2020, about 500 plans will provide approximately up to 2.6 million Medicare Advantage enrollees with access to expanded primarily health related supplemental benefits, such as adult care services or caregiver support services.
• Expanding opportunities for chronically ill patients to choose Medicare Advantage plans that offer a broader range of supplemental benefits that are not necessarily health-related but may help to improve or maintain their health. For example, chronically ill beneficiaries enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan can now receive meal delivery in more circumstances, transportation for non-medical needs like grocery shopping, and home environment services in order to improve their health or overall function as it relates to their chronic illness. About 250 plans in 2020 will offer access to these types of supplemental benefits reaching an estimated 1.2 million enrollees.
• Implementing recent legislation  to give seniors access to Medicare Advantage additional telehealth benefits so enrollees can use telehealth technology to access more providers in more parts of the country. For 2020, over half of all plans will offer additional telehealth benefits, reaching approximately up to 13.7 million Medicare Advantage enrollees.
• Providing clinicians with more information on out-pocket-costs and lower cost alternatives for prescription drugs so they can discuss with beneficiaries at the time a prescription is written.
• Providing beneficiaries with more drug choices and empowering beneficiaries to select a plan that best meets their needs by allowing plans to cover prescription drugs differently depending on the reasons for which they are prescribed, an approach used in the private sector.

Although there are additional lower-cost choices, it will, according to CMS, be easier than ever to compare Medicare Advantage and Part D plans on Medicare.gov. As the 2020 Medicare Open Enrollment period approaches, CMS for the first time in a decade launched a modernized and redesigned Medicare Plan Finder – what CMS reports is |the most used tool on Medicare.gov – that allows users to shop and compare Medicare Advantage and Part D plans as well as compare pricing between original Medicare, Medicare prescription drug plans, Medicare Advantage plans and Medicare supplemental insurance or Medigap policies.

CMS anticipates updating Medicare.gov with the 2020 Medicare Advantage and Part D premiums and cost-sharing information and releasing the Star Ratings for Medicare Advantage and Part D plans in early October.

 During open enrollment, Medicare beneficiaries can compare coverage options like Original Medicare and Medicare Advantage and choose health and drug plans for 2020. Medicare health and drug plan costs and covered benefits can change from year to year, so people with Medicare should look at their coverage choices and decide on the options that best meet their health needs.  Even with the assistance of a newly redesigned Medicare.gov., you should consider expert advice and consultation.  For these reasons, we strongly urge clients to establish a relationship with a trusted adviser.  Locally, many of our clients use the advisers at Harding, Harding & Associates. 

If you want to keep your current Medicare coverage, you do NOT need to re-enroll.  But, you may want to seek expert guidance whether this is a wise decision.

If you need additional help you can also call 1-800-MEDICARE, or contact your State Health Insurance Assistance Program. You can obtain contact information for any State here.  Simply type your state name in the first window, and type SHIP in the second.

To view the premiums and costs of 2020 Medicare Advantage and Part D plans, go here.

For state-by-state information on Medicare Advantage and Part D in 2020, go here.

Less Than One-Third of New Medicare Beneficiaries Enroll in Medicare Advantage

The Kaiser Family Foundation recently released new findings about what coverage new Medicare enrollees choose. This information is important in understanding what beneficiaries want from their coverage, and may shed insight into whether beneficiaries are availing themselves of available options. Some thought that the aging Baby Boom generation, having had more experience with HMOs and PPOs during their working years, would select the private plans over traditional Medicare at relatively high rates.  In fact, the share of new beneficiaries choosing Medicare Advantage has increased only modestly over the years.  

When you first become eligible for Medicare, either upon turning 65 or because you have a disability that makes you eligible, you have a decision to make: will you stay in the default program, referred to as original or traditional Medicare, or will you choose a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan? There is no one right choice. The best choice for an individual depends on their personal circumstances and their preferences. If  you have a trusted adviser, such as one the professionals at Harding & Harding and Associates, you may have someone that can assist you in navigating the array of choices and decisions. Our office highly recommends Harding & Harding, particularly for those new clients seeking to implement Aging in Place Planning.  

Often, your decision will be based on practicalities rather than financial considerations.  If you have a trusted medical provider, for example, you may not want to join an MA plan that might require you to change doctors.  If you are more concerned with financial objectives, you may prefer MA’s out-of-pocket maximum, especially if you expect your health care costs to be high.  The decision is not a simple decision, and recent changes may make the decision even more difficult than it has been in the past.  Readers of this blog are aware that recent changes to Medicare incentive and encourage long-term care planning, and Aging in Place benefits to be added to new MA plans.   

According to the report, around 22% of new enrollees chose Medicare Advantage in 2011. This number increased to around 29% in 2016, the most recent year of the report. These numbers are nationwide, but the rate of enrollment varies considerably depending on the enrollee’s geographic location, age, and whether they are eligible for Medicaid in addition to Medicare.

Importantly, when people with high needs enter the Medicare program, they are less likely to choose MA. This could mean that these new enrollees want to avoid potential issues with narrow provider networks and are not drawn to MA benefits like gym memberships, preventive care, and the like, that may be tailored to enrollees who are in excellent health.  Time will tell how individuals view the recent additions to MA plans.

The reasons newcomers choose to remain in traditional Medicare or switch to MA are important. But whatever the reason, it is clear that the majority of people with Medicare prefer the original program. 

Aging in Place: New CMS Policies are Changing the Way Investors View Home Health

"Patients have always had a preference for 'aging in place;' being cared for in the comfort and familiarity of their homes and communities. But for providers, bringing consistent, high-quality care to a patient’s home—and getting paid for it—has presented challenges.  Recent changes at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), however, are making these solutions even more practical. Changes to reimbursement guidelines have shifted how skilled home care is valued and has breathed new life into unskilled home care and telehealth services." So begins an excellent article penned by Barry Freeman and Michael Weber and published in FierceHealthcare.   The article, and the health care industry developments described therein, are welcome, because if the industry does not react to health care policy changes with acceptance, investment, an implementation, there can be no tangible change for consumers. 

The market incentives for investment to accommodate the desires of consumers wanting to Age in Place are undeniable; with 10,000 Baby Boomers turning 65 each day in the U.S., the market for home services is growing rapidly. The home care industry has exploded over the past decade, thanks in part to private equity interest and to older adults’ overwhelming preference to age in place. The good news is that the market opportunities and changes in health care policy are combining to attract new investment to specifically expand home care options and availability, benefiting both patients and investors.

CMS policies through the Patient-Driven Groupings Model (PDGM) going into effect in 2020 represent a major reform to the existing payment paradigm for the industry.  Skilled home health agencies are traditionally compensated in a way that penalizes providers for providing required services to patients with complex needs, while rewarding agencies that use higher volumes of therapy services for patients with less complex or simple needs. According to the authors, the new payment model envisaged by CMS will be based on each patients’ clinical condition, functional level and individual care needs, rather than the therapeutic intensity of the care provided.

The authors conclude that these changes are affecting how investors view the skilled home health market and paving the way for reform. Evidence demonstrating the interplay between social determinants of health and health outcomes is "shedding new light on the non-medical home care sector." Regulators, payers, providers and employers are "rethinking the role that social programs, like personal assistance services,  such as non-medical home care delivered by an attendant or aide, play in cost containment, outcomes-based care, and patient satisfaction."  

Readers of this blog are aware that CMS rolled out a disruptive and monumental change, last April, that permits private Medicare insurers to cover non-medical in-home care as a supplemental benefit for Medicare Advantage plans. For the first-time, aging Americans are able to purchase a Medicare Advantage policy that will cover bringing a home health aide to their home to help support their daily living; from getting dressed, to bathing, tidying up, cooking and combating senior loneliness, home health care can empower seniors, their families, and caregivers to provide home care  This policy change "created a new paradigm for the non-medical in-home care industry—expanding the addressable market by the more than 20 million seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans."

Although few insurers managed to incorporate non-medical in-home care in time for the 2019 plan year, the authors concluded that there, nonetheless, "remains an enormous growth opportunity for non-medical care providers and their investors." Even with a short period of time in which to reorient plans for the 2019 plan year, according to an AARP analysis, three percent of Medicare Advantage plans managed to offer these services in 2019. If consumers get good advice and prefer the additional benefits, there is little that number of plans providing the additional benefits will escalate as insurers vie for market share. 

These same reforms have also spurred investment in telehealth, already a growing segment in broader health care.  According to the authors, telehealth services have for decades helped keep employers’ and certain commercial plans’ healthcare costs lower, especially for under-served or rural populations. But, they write, "Medicare, Medicaid and providers have faced challenges getting paid for these tech-enabled services, which include video consultations, Personal Emergency Response Systems (PERS), or remote vitals monitoring."

The authors conclude that many of these challenges have likewise changed with the recent reform, specifically because CMS approved a final rule giving Medicare Advantage plans more flexibility to cover telehealth services in the home setting, even for patients in urban areas, where there is rarely a dearth of quality providers. CMS had only allowed telehealth reimbursement in situations where patients were managing a clinical condition without ready access to care, thus excluding most patients from access to the Aging-in-Place-technology.

The authors suggest that telehealth solutions will expand rapidly and naturally:

The convenience and affordability of telehealth solutions resonates with many patients and their families. According to Deft Research’s 2019 Medicare Shopping and Switching Study, the majority of Medicare Advantage members would change plans in order to procure access to telehealth services. Physicians and other clinicians benefit from the enhanced visibility they gain into their patients in real-time, as well as the stronger patient engagement in care that results from these tech-enabled tools. The addressable market for telehealth solutions is expanding rapidly as patients desire the convenience, providers appreciate the assistance, and health plans cover their use.

The authors see investment and capital following the opportunities: 

Private equity firms and strategic corporations are shaking up the landscape—to patients’ benefit, encouraging flexible treatment solutions that are becoming more innovative and widespread.  Large private equity funds like Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe and KKR have already made investments in home and community-based care in anticipation of the tremendous future growth opportunities.

Skilled and unskilled home care markets and companies like Amedisys, Kindred at Home and Elara Caring are likely to consolidate, building a continuum of care from post-acute to sub-acute home and community-based capabilities. In the telehealth space, already established players are being challenged by newcomer startups offering to place quality care in the palm of patients’ hands.

The future is promising for both those planning to Age in Place, and for those seeking to invest and profit in making the option of Aging in Place viable and cost-effective.  This is welcome and disruptive reform to a senior health care system that has too long preferred long-term institutional care.

2019 Medicare Advantage Plans Incorporate Long Term Care, Aging in Place Benefits

Some Medicare Advantage Plan (hereafter simply "Plan") issuers are quietly and carefully adding home-based and community-based long-term care (LTC) benefits for 2019, according to Allison Bell, ThinkAdvisor's insurance editor. According to an excellent ThinkAdvisor article, officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). estimate that about 1.5 million of the 2019 enrollees, or 7.5% of Medicare Advantage plan enrollees, may have access either to support services in the home or community, or to extra benefits designed to help enrollees cope with the burden of diabetes or other chronic conditions. CMS officials have not, however, estimated how many enrollees might have access solely to the new home- or community-based services.  

A previous blog article discussed these changes; see the article entitled, "Trump Administration Embraces Aging In Place- 2019 Advantage Plans Permitted to Incorporate Long Term Care," available by clicking here. 

In Arizona and California, for example, units of Anthem Inc. are openly stating that they will use the new flexibility to beef up the benefits offered by some plans.  Enrollees in certain Anthem plans will have access to what amount to LTC benefits provided for a short period of time:

• Three meals delivered per day for up to 42 days.
• Four four-hour shifts of in-home assistance with daily living activities, such as laundry.
• 40 hours of respite care for caregivers per year.
• One visit per week for adult day care center services, for older adults who need supervision.
• Health care appointment transportation services.

Traditionally, commercial insurers have referred to benefits for small amounts of LTC-type services with terms such as “convalescent care benefits,” or “short-term care benefits.”  SCAN Health Plans of Long Beach, California, says it will offer new in-home benefits through most plans in Southern California, but it’s not easy to tell which new benefits will be related to the new rules.

UnitedHealth Group Inc.’s UnitedHealthcare unit says it will make telemedicine services available to 1.7 million enrollees through phones and computers, and health-related transportation services available to 1.7 million enrollees. The company is also offering a care management and care planning service for caregivers to most of its Medicare Advantage plans. It’s not clear from the company’s 2019 plan announcement whether those beneits are related to the new CMS rules.

Lack of clarity is a real problem. Unfortunately, for someone looking at the CMS 2019 Plan Information or even the plan issuers’ own benefits summary sheets, it is not easy to tell which plans will take advantage of the new CMS benefits flexibility.  Moreover, the value of these additional services, and possible resulting costs are difficult for a lay person to evaluate.  For these reasons, we strongly urge clients to establish a relationship with a trusted advisor.  Locally, many of our clients use the advisors at Harding, Harding & Associates. 

Traditionally, Medicaid has been the government health program that pays for nursing home care.  Federal rules have blocked Medicare from paying for long-term care.  Medicare has paid for skilled nursing care for people recovering from serious acute health care problems, and promised to pay for limited home health care services.

But Medicare has not paid for nursing home care for people who are in a nursing home simply because they are frail or have trouble with the activities of daily living, such as bathing or eating.  Medicare has also avoided paying for other types of in-home services, such as help with cleaning or laundry, that might help keep older people in their homes.

In May, CMS said it would change Medicare Advantage benefits rules, to give issuers ways to offer new benefits for the “social determinants of care” that might help reduce overall medical spending.  Officials suggested, for example, that, in some cases, spending a little money on transportation services or meal delivery for someone with serious health problems might be a good way to avoid spending a lot of money on hospital care. 

Trump Administration Embraces Aging In Place- 2019 Advantage Plans Permitted to Incorporate Long Term Care

Starting in 2019, Medicare Advantage plans can cover adult day care services, and in-home help with activities such as dressing, bathing and managing medications, a top Trump administration official said Wednesday, according to an article entitled, "Official Gives Hints About Medicare Advantage LTC Benefits," published in ThinkAdvisor.  The move might make Medicare Advantage Plans (hereafter "Plans") more attractive alternatives to Medicare. 

Seema Verma, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), spoke about the Medicare Advantage program’s new benefits flexibility at a Medicare conference at CMS headquarters, in Baltimore.  CMS announced the changes in April, in a memo sent to potential 2019 Plan issuers. According to the article, while it is not yet clear whether any issuers will add significant supplemental benefits for 2019, "executives from Humana Inc. hinted during their first-quarter earnings call that they might be able to work with partners"  to provide such benefits.

According to the article:

Verma told insurance company executives at the conference that CMS hopes its new “reinterpretation” of the Medicare Advantage program benefits rules will help unleash private-sector innovation and creativity.  She said she has seen the effects of that creativity in her own life.  “Both my parents are enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan, and they can’t stop talking about them,” Verma said, according to a written version of her remarks distributed by CMS.

A copy of Verma's speech is available here.  

The Old Rules

The Medicare Advantage program lets private insurers use a combination of government money and patient premiums to provide an alternative to traditional Medicare coverage.  In the past, managers of Medicare Advantage have tried to simplify the Plan shopping process, and discouraged Plans from offering benefits that might drive up health care costs, by putting tight restrictions on the kinds of benefits a Plan issuer can offer.  Those restrictions kept Plan issuers from adding benefits such as adult day care benefits, except when the Plans were participating in CMS pilot programs or other special programs.

The New Rules

CMS is employing a new strategy permitting Plans that offer benefits that  compensate for physical impairments, reduce the impact of injuries, or reduce avoidable use of emergency rooms.  Although Verma did not use the terms “long-term care,” or “short-term care,” in her remarks or written speech, the benefits she described are similar to the kinds of benefits many private long-term care insurance policies offer through home health care and community care provisions.  The new approach and resulting rules will also allow Plans to add supplemental benefits tailored to meet the needs of people with specific conditions, including chronic conditions.

The new interpretations are separate from and further expand the chronic care benefits already offered in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 through Medicare. The BBA-2018 provisions expand the range of Medicare supplemental benefits chronically ill enrollees can get starting in 2020.

Requirements for Supplemental Benefits

Of course, the devil is often in the details, and proposed rules were not published. Regardless, the guidance suggests that the additional Plan benefits must ensure the benefits are ”primarily health related,” and "not primarily for a patient’s comfort."  The services covered "must be recommended by a physician or other licensed medical professional as part of a care plan," and the new benefits "must not include items or services used to induce enrollment."  A Plan can choose to help individuals both with basic “activities of daily living,” such as walking, and with the “instrumental activities of daily living,” such as taking medications correctly.

The new interpretation will let a Plan tailor benefits, such as deductibles or wellness options, to fit people with certain medical conditions, such as diabetes.  That interpretation will not, however, allow a Plan to tailor benefits based on an enrollee’s income or poverty level, or any other characteristic other than health status.  Plans must use “objective and measurable” criteria to identify eligible enrollees.