Minnesota Legislation

The bill prohibits individual and group health insurance policies from applying NQTLs on MH/SUD benefits that are not also equitably applied to med/surgical benefits. Additionally, the bill requires mental health therapy visits and medication maintenance visits to be considered primary care visits for the purpose of cost-sharing requirements. The bill also requires the Commissioner of Commerce with the Commissioner of Health to submit a report to the legislature detailing parity overview and enforcement activities. Such report must be written in nontechnical, readily understandable language and must be made available to the public

This bill amends Minnesota Statutes 2018, section 62Q.47 to prohibit the application of NQTLs upon mental health and substance use disorder benefits in any manner than is incomparable to the application of such on medical and surgical benefits. The bill requires insurers who offer mental health and substance use disorder benefits to submit to the Commissioner of Commerce a report that demonstrates compliance with parity requirements using specified guidelines. Additionally, the bill requires the Commissioner to implement and enforce the Federal Parity Law, its implementing regulations, and relevant state requirements. The Commissioner with the Commissioner of Health must submit a report to the legislature detailing enforcement activities. Such report must be made be posted to a publically available website.  Furthermore, the bill amends Section 62Q.01 to define “Classification of benefits,” “Mental health conditions and substance use disorders,” and “Nonquantitative treatment limitations or NQTLs.”

This bill seeks to change a section of the state insurance law about utilization review . It would change a the law so that a peer of a patient’s provider is required to review any denials of inpatient behavioral health services made by a utilization review organization. Previously this had only been required for denials of outpatient services.
The bill would also require a psychiatrist certified in child and adolescent psychiatry to review any denials of behavioral health services a utilization review organization makes about anyone under 18.

This bill seeks to change the requirements for utilization review reporting. Among other things, the bill requires utilization review organizations to submit an annual report with the following information:

• The number of requests, by drug;
• The number of requests approved, by drug
• The number of appeals, by drug
• The number of appeals approved, by drug
• The number of appeals denied, by drug
• For standard review, the average time from receipt of request to notification of decision
• For expedited reviews, the average time from receipt of request to notification of decision
• For standard appeals, the average time from receipt of request to notification of decision
• The ten most frequently reviewed services

The bill also requires health plans to make available formularies used in the determination of prescription drug benefits. While this bill is not specific to behavioral health coverage, the information utilization review organizations must submit may highlight potential parity violations.

This bill seeks to change state insurance law about coverage for autism treatment. The bill would change the law so that it would apply to all insurance plans. Currently it only applies to large employer plans . It would also make minor changes in the wording of the bill to increase clarity. For instance, “children under 18 with autism spectrum disorders” would be changed to “a child under age 18 with an autism spectrum disorder.”

This bill attempts to change a section of state law related to essential health benefits . It orders the Minnesota Department of Commerce to ask the United States Department of Health and Human Services to include autism services in the state’s essential health benefits for 2016. This part of the law already existed, but it pushed the effective date back from 12/31/2014 to 7/1/2015.

This bill intended to extend Medicaid reimbursement for psychiatric consultation to include licensed independent clinical social workers. Prior to this bill, eligible providers include psychiatrists, psychologists, and advanced practice registered nurses certified in psychiatric mental health. This bill was later incorporated into HF 1638/SF 1458.

Among many other things, this comprehensive bill tried to change the state insurance law about behavioral health coverage. The changes it proposed were the exact same as what are found in HF779/SF662, which did become law. Please read the summary for that bill in the section above about legislation signed into law for 2013-2014.

This bill tried to change the state social welfare law so that Medicaid would cover consultation with any mental health professional, not just a psychiatrist.

This bill tried to change the state social welfare law so that Medicaid would cover consultation with any mental health professional, not just a psychiatrist. HF1233/SF1034 from the same legislative session had the same requirement. HF 1233/SF 1034 was signed into law (summarized above in “Legislation Signed into Law”).

This bill was added into HF1233/SF1034, which is listed above in the 2013-2014 “Legislation Signed Into Law” section. This bill amended the state insurance law to add the section that requires insurance plans to cover services for autism. A summary of this section of the state insurance law can be found at the bottom of the page.

This bill tried to change the state insurance law so that all insurance plans would be required to cover services for autism instead of just large employer plans. It also would have strengthened language regarding how medically necessary care is defined. The bill also tried to change the state law regarding Medicaid in several ways. Treatment reviews would be restricted to once every 12 months instead of once every 6 months and two different provisions would allow for continuation of treatment even if progress is not being made. The bill also would have required the Minnesota Comprehensive Health Association to continue beyond 12/31/2014 exclusively for the treatment of autism until autism coverage became an essential health benefit under the Affordable Care Act.

This bill tried to add autism coverage into the state insurance law. This is similar to the bill that was signed into law in the 2013-2014 legislative session. However, this bill was much more extensive and would have required insurance plans to cover more services for autism than they do now. A summary of the state’s law about autism can be found at the bottom of the page.

This bill tried to add autism coverage into the state insurance law. This is similar to the bill that was signed into law in the 2013-2014 legislative session. This version does not have a section saying that it doesn’t apply to state health care programs. A summary of the state’s law about autism can be found at the bottom of this page.

This bill tried to change the state social welfare law so that Medicaid would cover consultation with a psychologist, not just a psychiatrist. This bill is identical to HF1421/SF1186 from the 2011-2012 legislative session.

This bill tried to add autism coverage into the state insurance law. This is similar to the bill that was signed into law in the 2013-2014 legislative session. This bill does state that plans must cover services for autism up to age 25, which is not in the current law. This bill does not have a section exempting state healthcare programs. A summary of the state’s law about autism can be found at the bottom of this page.