BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                           Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair

                                           630 (Steinberg)
          
          Hearing Date:  4/27/2009        Amended: As Introduced
          Consultant: Katie Johnson       Policy Vote: Health 10-0
          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____
          BILL SUMMARY:  SB 630 would provide that no health care service  
          plan or health insurance contract could exclude coverage for  
          dental or orthodontic services that are related to, and  
          medically necessary to provide or complete, reconstructive  
          surgery as defined in current law.
          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____
                            Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions         2009-10      2010-11       2011-12     Fund
                                                                  
          CalPERS state            unknown, but potentially more  
          thanGeneral/
          employers' cost                 $50 General Funds and  Special*
                                   $150 Special Funds annually

          Medi-Cal increased       unknown, but potentially more  
          thanGeneral/
          reimbursement to health  $50 General Funds annuallyFederal**
          plans and insurers

          *Each state agency pays its employees premiums to CalPERS out of  
          its budget. Approximately 55 percent of employee premiums are  
          from the General Fund and 45 percent are from other state funds.  
          These other funds are made up of approximately 67 percent  
          special funds and 33 percent moneys from other sources such as  
          federal funds.

          **Medi-Cal costs are shared 50% General Fund and 50% federal  
          funds. However, in February of 2009, President Obama signed the  
          American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) into law. As a  
          result, the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP)  
          increased from 50 percent to 61.59 percent. Thus, retroactively  
          from October 1, 2008 through December 31, 2010, the federal  
          government would pay for approximately 62 percent and the state  
          General Fund would pay for 38 percent of benefit-related  
          Medi-Cal expenditures.










          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____

          STAFF COMMENTS:  This bill meets the criteria for referral to  
          the Suspense File.

          Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of health  
          care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care  
          (DMHC) and for the regulation of health insurers by the  
          California Department of Insurance (CDI). Costs to perform  
          regulatory duties associated with this bill would be minor and  
          absorbable to both departments.

          Existing law requires health care service plans and health  
          insurers to cover reconstructive surgery, defined as, "surgery  
          performed to correct or repair abnormal structures of the body  
          caused by congenital defects, developmental abnormalities, 

          Page 2
          SB 630 (Steinberg)

          trauma, infection, tumors, or disease to do either of the  
          following:  (1) to improve function. (2) to create a normal  
          appearance, to the extent possible."

          This bill would require that a plan contract could not exclude  
          coverage for dental or orthodontic services related to, and  
          medically necessary to provide or complete, reconstructive  
          surgery.

          This bill is similar to SB 1634 (Steinberg), a bill that would  
          have required health plans and insurers to cover orthodontic  
          services deemed necessary for medical reasons for cleft palate  
          procedures. A cleft palate or a cleft lip is a congenital  
          defect. The Governor vetoed SB 1634 stating, "?The costs  
          associated with new mandates means that those costs are passed  
          through to the purchaser and consumer. They are a significant  
          driver of cost."

          In a 2008 California Health Benefits Review Program (CHBRP)  
          analysis of SB 1634 (Steinberg), a bill which would have  
          required health plans and insurers to cover medically necessary  
          orthodontic services related to cleft palate procedures, $68,000  
          in costs to the California Public Employees Retirement System  
          (CalPERS) employer members were identified as a result of  
          increased premiums due to the requirements of SB 1634.  










          Approximately 60 percent of these costs are attributable to  
          state funds, with 
          55 percent of that being from the General Fund ($22,500) and 45  
          percent of that being from other funds ($18,500). 

          Staff notes that since the CHBRP analysis only addresses costs  
          associated with requiring plans and insurers to provide dental  
          and orthodontic services for one type of a congenital defect and  
          the definition in law of reconstructive surgery covers not only  
          congenital defects, but several other categories that could  
          cause abnormal body structures, the cost to CalPERS associated  
          with increased premiums as a result of this bill would be more  
          than those identified in the CHBRP analysis. For example, if the  
          cost of covering cleft palate reconstructive surgery increased  
          premiums for CalPERS as stated above, it is likely that the  
          costs of implementing this bill could result in over $50,000 GF  
          and over $150,000 in special fund costs to CalPERS annually.

          Existing law creates the California Children Services (CCS)  
          program and provides that it is administered by the Department  
          of Health Care Services (DHCS) and county health departments.  
          The purpose of the CCS program is to provide children with  
          chronic medical conditions, such as cystic fibrosis, cancer, and  
          hemophilia, with diagnostic and treatment services, case  
          management, and physical and occupational therapy services.  
          Existing law establishes the state's Medicaid program referred  
          to as Medi-Cal for the purposes of providing health benefits to  
          low-income children, pregnant women, and the elderly, blind and  
          disabled, among others. Existing law establishes the Healthy  
          Families Program (HFP) which provides low-cost health benefits  
          for low-income children. 

          Medi-Cal managed care plans and the HFP plans are responsible  
          for paying for an enrollee's non-CCS condition health care  
          needs. In Medi-Cal, CCS services, and dental services that are  
          not included in managed care plans, are paid by fee-for-service  
          Medi-Cal. Since this bill would require all types of health  
          plans and insurers to provide dental 
          Page 3
          SB 630 (Steinberg)

          and orthodontic services related to reconstructive surgery for  
          members, it is possible that this bill would require health  
          plans and insurers who provide managed care plans that  
          "carve-out" dental and CCS services to now provide those  
          services which would increase the cost of providing health care  










          to Medi-Cal enrollees. If a health plan or insurer's costs  
          increase, it is likely that they would renegotiate their  
          Medi-Cal reimbursement rates at a higher rate to cover increased  
          costs. Additionally, in the 2009-2010 Budget Act, Medi-Cal  
          coverage for adult dental services was eliminated. This bill  
          could cause a health plan or insurer to provide an unreimbursed  
          service to an adult Medi-Cal enrollee and thus increase the cost  
          to the health plan or insurer to provide health care to its  
          enrollees.