Issue link: https://blog.providence.org/i/1035653
Evaluating State Mental Health and Addiction Parity Statutes: A Technical Report 2 This policy analysis was designed to identify key elements of state legal codes relating to parity. By employing a systematic, replicable methodology of indexing and coding statutes, a comparative analysis of state parity laws is possible. Based on the results of the Statutory Coding Instrument (SCI), the states with the highest grades and points for their statutes are Illinois (A, 100), Tennessee (C, 79), Maine (C, 76), Alabama (C, 74), Virginia (C,71), and New Hampshire (C, 71). However, the laws of most of these higher-scoring states have room for improvement. The state statutes with the lowest grades and points are Wyoming (F, 10), Arizona (F, 26), Idaho (F, 36), Indiana (F, 38), Alaska (F, 43), and Nebraska (F, 43). The key issues and recommendations for improvement based on frequent deficiencies found in our analysis of state statutes include: Key Issue Legislative Recommendation How mental health & substance use disorders are defined Mental health and substance use disorders (MH/SUD) must be seen as broad as physical health conditions. As such, states should define MH/SUD to include all disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) with no exclusions. How mental health & substance use disorders are covered Conditions that share the same characteristics should be treated in the same way. As such, co-pays and out-of-pocket costs, along with insurer medical management requirements must be the same for MH/SUD services as those for physical illnesses. States should require that insurance benefit management processes and treatment limitations, specifically both for quantitative treatment limitations (QTL) and non- quantitative treatment limitations, (NQTL) ensure parity in coverage. How compliance with the parity law is monitored and enforced States should strengthen enforcement and compliance activities by empowering regulatory agencies to enforce parity laws, including the Federal Parity Law, and require monitoring agencies to regularly report on steps taken to enforce compliance. In addition, states should mandate that all health benefit plans submit regular (e.g., annual) analyses demonstrating compliance with the relevant laws.