Health

Research articles · Dec 31, 2013

The COMPARE microsimulation model and the U.S. Affordable Care Act

Amado Cordova, Federico Girosi, Sarah Nowak, Christine Eibner, Kenneth Finegold

RAND Corporation, United States; Centre for Health Research, University of Western Sydney, Australia; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, United States

Volume 6(3) Winter 2013

Cite as: A. Cordova, F. Girosi, S. Nowak, C. Eibner, K. Finegold; 2013; The COMPARE microsimulation model and the U.S. Affordable Care Act; International Journal of Microsimulation; 6(3); 78–117. doi: 10.34196/ijm.00089

Abstract

In anticipation of upcoming health care legislation, the RAND Corporation developed a microsimulation model to forecast the responses of individuals, families and firms to such legislation. The COMPARE (COMPrehensive Assessment of Reform Efforts) microsimulation has been used to estimate the impact of major policy changes in the United States, such as the Affordable Care Act on uninsurance rates, participation in the group and the non-group insurance markets, firms’ insurance offer rates, enrollment in public programs such as Medicaid and CHIP, private insurance premiums and costs to the federal and state governments.

The team selected utility maximization to model behaviors, a methodology that is better suited than spreadsheet or econometric models to predict how individuals, households and firms will respond to wholly new insurance options, such as the Health Insurance Marketplace and the Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) Exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act. Modeling can be done both at the national and at a state-specific levels. In this paper we provide a summary of COMPARE’s basic principles, its nationally representative databases, its utility-maximization behavioral models, and how we have used COMPARE to estimate the consequences of the Affordable Care Act.

This article contains 2 figures and 4 tables.

Figures

Figure 1. How COMPARE creates a synthetic representation of the U.S. from its data sources.
Figure 2. Schematic representation of the reweight-calibrate-run or RCR procedure.

Tables

Table 1. U.S. Health insurance coverage in 2012.
Type of coverage Who is covered Funding source Number (in millions) Percentage of the population
Employer-sponsored insurance Employees of offering firms and their family members Employer and employee contributions 170.9 54.9%
Private Nongroup (also known as “individual market”) Individuals and families purchasing coverage Individual premiums 30.6 9.8%
Medicaid/CHIP Low-income children, parents, elderly, and disabled; childless nondisabled adults are eligible in some states Federal government and states; counties share financial responsibility in some states 50.9 16.4%
Medicare Elderly and disabled Federal government 48.9 15.7%
Military Current members of the armed forces and their families, veterans Federal government 13.7 4.4%
Uninsured N/A N/A 48.0 15.4%
TOTAL 311.1 116.7%

Note: Percentages total more than 100.0% because some Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS-ASEC) respondents reported more than one type of coverage during Calendar Year 2012.

Source: Carmen DeNavas-Walt, Bernadette D. Proctor, and Jessica C. Smith, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P60–245, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2012, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 2013, p. 67.

Table 2. Medical loss ratio assumptions in compare.
Pre-Reform, Grandfathered, and Large Group Plans Post-Reform, Regulated market
Group Market
< 25 0.80 0.88
26–100 0.87 0.88
101 + 0.92 NA
Non-group market 0.70 0.80

Note: NA means not applicable, since the MLRs of firms with 101+ employees are not modified by the Affordable Care Act.

Table 3. Comparison of compare and CBO national-level coverage estimates for the non-elderly U.S. population in the year 2016 (in millions).
Insurance Coverage CBO (no ACA) CBO (ACA) CBO (change due to ACA) COMPARE (no ACA) COMPARE (ACA) COMPARE (Change due to ACA)
Medicaid and CHIP 33 45 12 46 62 16
Employer sponsored 161 155 −6 154 154 0
Non-group and Other 26 22 −4 24 12 −12
Individual Exchanges NA 22 22 NA 26 26
Uninsured 56 31 −25 52 23 −29

Note: ACA=Affordable Care Act.

ACAAffordable Care Act
ACSAmerican Community Survey
ASECAnnual Social and Economic Supplement
ASPEOffice of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
CBOCongressional Budget Office
CCIIOCenter for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight
CHIPChildren’s Health Insurance Program
CMSCenter for Medicare and Medicaid Services
COMPARECOMPrehensive Assessment of Reform Efforts
CPSCurrent Population Survey
CSGCouncil of State Governments
DHHSU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
EHBessential health benefits
ESIemployer-sponsored insurance
FFEsFederally-Facilitated Exchanges
FPLFederal Poverty Level
HIEUhealth insurance eligibility unit
HRETHealth Research and Educational Trust
MEPSMedical Expenditure Panel Survey
MEPS-HCMedical Expenditure Panel Survey, Household Component
MSPSMultistate Plans
NATSEMNational Centre for Social and Economic Modeling
NHEANational Health Expenditure Accounts
OPMOffice of Personnel Management
SAGAState-Administered General Assistance
SBEState-Based Exchanges
SHEAstate health insurance expenditure accounts
SHOPSmall Business Health Options Program
SIPPSurvey of Income and Program Participation
SoASociety of Actuaries
SPEAssistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
SUSBSurvey of U.S. Businesses