How Well Does Medicaid Work in Improving Access to Care?

OBJECTIVE: To provide an assessment of how well the Medicaid program is working at improving access to and use of health care for low-income mothers. DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING: The 1997 and 1999 National Survey of America's Families, with state and county information drawn from the Area Resource File and other sources. STUDY DESIGN: Estimate the effects of Medicaid on access and use relative to private coverage and being uninsured, using instrumental variables methods to control for selection into insurance status. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHOD: This study combines data from 1997 and 1999 for mothers in families with incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We find that Medicaid beneficiaries' access and use are significantly better than those obtained by the uninsured. Analysis that controls for insurance selection shows that the benefits of having Medicaid coverage versus being uninsured are substantially larger than what is estimated when selection is not accounted for. Our results also indicate that Medicaid beneficiaries' access and use are comparable to that of the low-income privately insured. Once insurance selection is controlled for, access and use under Medicaid is not significantly different from access and use under private insurance. Without controls for insurance selection, access and use for Medicaid beneficiaries is found to be significantly worse than for the low-income privately insured. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the Medicaid program improved access to care relative to uninsurance for low-income mothers, achieving access and use levels comparable to those of the privately insured. Our results also indicate that prior research, which generally has not controlled for selection into insurance coverage, has likely understated the gains of Medicaid relative to uninsurance and overstated the gains of private coverage relative to Medicaid.     

Covering the uninsured through TennCare: does it make a difference?

Tennessee created TennCare in 1994 to address the needs of "poor and uninsured citizens ... excluded from the health care system." Under TennCare, Tennessee implemented managed care in its Medicaid program and used savings anticipated from the switch to expand insurance coverage to uninsured and uninsurable adults and children. Our analysis of the expansion suggests that it improved access to care, reduced unmet need, and encouraged use of preventive services, particularly for children. These changes coincided with higher levels of satisfaction with care among TennCare beneficiaries.     

The health care experiences of rural Medicaid beneficiaries

Medicaid plays a vital role in rural America, yet, because of data limitations, little research exists on the health care experiences of low-income rural adults. We use data from the National Survey of America's Families, with its oversample of low-income populations, to examine differences in access to and use of care between urban and rural Medicaid beneficiaries, and between Medicaid beneficiaries and low-income privately insured adults in urban and rural areas. We find evidence that access to care under Medicaid is worse than under private insurance in both urban and rural areas; however, Medicaid beneficiaries have a more consistent level of access across urban and rural areas than do low-income privately insured people.     

Commentary on Gurewich et Al, "comparative performance of community health centers and other usual sources of primary care": community health centers: valuable partners for state medicaid programs

Community health centers are well positioned to bring needed primary care to populations experiencing the most acute health disparities. Health centers already care for 1 in 7 Medicaid beneficiaries and 1 in 5 low-income, uninsured individuals. And they generate $24 billion in annual savings to the entire health care system, including $6 billion for Medicaid programs. Health center patients are distinctly different from patients of other providers, and successfully meet the challenges associated with serving those who have special needs that require more time and resources to address. For this reason, health centers provide a much more comprehensive array of services, both health care and services that facilitate access to care, compared to private practice physicians. With more beneficiaries joining the Medicaid rolls under health reform, and the limited number of providers available to serve the most complex, hard-to-reach, and underserved patients, health centers will play an increasingly important partnership role with state Medicaid programs. Continued investments are necessary to effectively serve at-risk patients.     

Uninsurance,Underinsurance, and Health Care Utilization in Mexico by US Border Residents

Using data from the 2008 Cross-Border Utilization of Health Care Survey, we examined the relationship between United States (US) health insurance coverage plans and the use of health care services in Mexico by US residents of the US-Mexico border region. We found immigrants were far more likely to be uninsured than their native-born counterparts (63 vs. 27.8 %). Adults without health insurance coverage were more likely to purchase medications or visit physicians in Mexico compared to insured adults. However, adults with Medicaid coverage were more likely to visit dentists in Mexico compared to uninsured adults. Improving health care access for US residents in the southwestern border region of the country will require initiatives that target not only providing coverage to the large uninsured population but also improving access to health care services for the large underinsured population.     

Low-income Californians' experiences with health insurance and managed care.

California is rapidly implementing mandatory managed care for most of its Medicaid (Medi-Cal) beneficiaries. To assess the impact of this delivery system change, the authors analyzed a 1996 statewide population-based random-sample telephone survey of 3,563 adults between the ages of 18 and 64. Respondents with Medi-Cal managed care and Medi-Cal fee-for-service rated access to care and quality of care significantly higher than uninsured respondents yet lower than low-income privately insured individuals. While the authors did not find a difference in health care access and quality among Medi-Cal managed care enrollees compared with Medi-Cal fee-for-service enrollees, they also did not find that managed care provided any observed advantages to Medi-Cal recipients.     

Effects of the State Children's Health Insurance Program on access to dental care and use of dental services

OBJECTIVE: To provide national estimates of implementation effects of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) on dental care access and use for low-income children. DATA SOURCE: The 1997-2002 National Health Interview Survey. STUDY DESIGN: The study design is based on variation in the timing of SCHIP implementation across states and among children observed before and after implementation. Two analyses were conducted. The first estimated the total effect of SCHIP implementation on unmet need for dental care due to cost in the past year and dental services use for low-income children (family income below state SCHIP eligibility thresholds) using county and time fixed effects models. The second analysis estimated differences in dental care access and use among low-income children with SCHIP or Medicaid coverage and their uninsured counterparts, using instrumental variables methods to control for selection bias. Both analyses controlled for child and family characteristics. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: When SCHIP had been implemented for more than 1 year, the probability of unmet dental care needs for low-income children was lowered by 4 percentage points. Compared with their uninsured counterparts, those who had SCHIP or Medicaid coverage were less likely to report unmet dental need by 8 percentage points (standard error: 2.3), and more likely to have visited a dentist within 6 or 12 months by 17 (standard error: 3.7) and 23 (standard error: 3.6) percentage points, respectively. SCHIP program type had no differential effects. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent results from two analytical approaches provide evidence that SCHIP implementation significantly reduced financial barriers for dental care for low-income children in the U.S. Low-income children enrolled in SCHIP or Medicaid had substantially increased use of dental care than the uninsured.     

Access to care and use of health services by low-income women

Data from the 1997 National Survey of America's Families (NSAF) are used to analyze access to care and use of health care services for low-income women. Three groups of women are examined: those with Medicaid coverage, those with private coverage, and those with no insurance. Findings show that uninsured women faced larger access barriers and utilized fewer services, particularly preventive care services, than women with either public or private coverage. Access and use did not differ greatly between Medicaid and privately covered women. The results suggest that expansions in coverage, either through Medicaid or through private options, could improve access to care for uninsured women.     

Pennsylvania's medically uninsured population: findings from a statewide survey

Pennsylvania is currently considering legislative options to expand coverage and improve access to medical care for state residents who lack health insurance. Relevant data are presented from a telephone survey of 10,809 Pennsylvania households. Almost nine percent (8.5%) of the state's population lacks health insurance, representing over one million people. Those most likely to be uninsured are children and young adults, non-whites and the poor. A substantial number of poor people are not covered by the state's Medicaid program. The uninsured report poorer health status, more obstacled to receiving care and greater use of hospital services for primary care.     

State Medicaid coverage and access to care for low-income adults

OBJECTIVE: Budgetary pressures have led some states to limit Medicaid eligibility. We evaluated access to care for all low-income adults by the extent of state Medicaid coverage. METHODS: Current Population Survey data compiled by the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured were used to rank the 48 continental states by the extent of Medicaid coverage for low-income non-elderly adults during 2000-2003. Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for 2000-2003 were used to assess indicators of access to care, including being unable to see a physician due to cost, not obtaining routine checkups, and four preventive services for appropriate age groups by state. Access gaps were calculated between low-income (under $25,000/year) and high-income ($50,000 or more/year) adults within each state to control for unmeasured economic and health system differences between states. RESULTS: Access gaps between high and low-income people who could not see physicians due to cost were significantly smaller in states with the broadest Medicaid coverage compared with states with the narrowest coverage (19.2% vs. 23.7%, p=.003). Significantly smaller access gaps also occurred in states with broader Medicaid coverage for cholesterol testing (16.0% vs. 18.7%, p=.01), and Pap testing (6.0% vs. 10.8%, p=.002), but not colorectal cancer screening (13.3% vs. 12.5%, p=.28), mammography (14.3% vs. 19.7%, p=.07), and routine checkup within two years (8.0% vs. 9.3%, p=.10). CONCLUSIONS: A state's level of Medicaid coverage was associated with access to physicians' services, cholesterol testing, and cervical cancer screening for low-income adults. Broad Medicaid coverage may be an effective strategy for states to improve access to care and preventive services for low-income adults.     

State implementation of the Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act of 2000: a collaborative effort among government agencies

The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP),administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention through grants to states, tribes, and territories, has successfully provided breast and cervical cancer screening and diagnostic services to low-income women since 1990. On October 24, 2000, Congress passed the Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act (BCCPTA) authorizing states, if they chose, to provide Medicaid coverage for treatment services for women screened under theNBCCEDP. Under BCCPTA, uninsured women younger than age 65 who are screened through the NBCCEDP and found to have breast or cervical cancer (or precancerous conditions) may gain access to Medicaid services for and during their cancer treatment. Implementation of the BCCPTA requires collaboration and coordination among many government agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, state Medicaid directors, and directors of state and tribal grant programs. This article describes the implementation of the program and demonstrates to policy makers that coordinating resources among government agencies can facilitate the rapid adoption of public health programs as pathways for specific populations to gain access to publicly funded health insurance coverage.     

Insuring low-income adults: does public coverage crowd out private?

During the mid-1990s Minnesota, Washington State, Oregon, and Tennessee implemented programs to provide subsidized health insurance for low-income persons who were not previously eligible for Medicaid. We estimate the effects of these programs on the health insurance status of low-income adults in these states. We find that among persons with family incomes below 100 percent of the federal poverty level, subsidized public coverage reduced the number of uninsured persons with very little effect on private coverage rates. Among persons with income between 100 percent and 200 percent of FPL, public coverage reduced the number of uninsured persons and crowded out some private insurance. The partial successes achieved by these programs should be kept in perspective: Even after program implementation, approximately 30 percent of low-income adults in the four states were uninsured.     

Lessons for coverage expansion: a Virginia primary care program for the uninsured reduced utilization and cut costs

The Affordable Care Act will expand health insurance coverage for an estimated thirty-two million uninsured Americans. Increased access to care is intended to reduce the unnecessary use of services such as emergency department visits and to achieve substantial cost savings. However, there is little evidence for such claims. To determine how the uninsured might respond once coverage becomes available, we studied uninsured low-income adults enrolled in a community-based primary care program at Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center. For people continuously enrolled in the program, emergency department visits and inpatient admissions declined, while primary care visits increased during the study period. Inpatient costs fell each year for this group. Over three years of enrollment, average total costs per year per enrollee fell from $8,899 to $4,569--a savings of almost 50 percent. We conclude that previously uninsured people may have fewer emergency department visits and lower costs after receiving coverage but that it may take several years of coverage for substantive health care savings to occur.     

Reconsidering the effect of Medicaid on health care services use.

OBJECTIVE: Our research compares health care use by Medicaid beneficiaries with that of the uninsured and the privately insured to measure the program's effect on access to care. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Data include the 1987 National Medical Expenditure Survey and the Survey of Income and Program Participation for 1984-1988. STUDY DESIGN: We predict annual use of ambulatory care and inpatient hospital care for Medicaid beneficiaries receiving AFDC cash assistance and compare it to what their use would be if uninsured or if covered by private insurance. Comparisons are based on multivariate models of health care use that control for demographic and economic characteristics and for health status. Our model distinguishes among Medicaid beneficiaries on the basis of eligibility to account for the poor health of beneficiaries in some eligibility groups. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: AFDC Medicaid beneficiaries use considerably more ambulatory care and inpatient care than they would if they remained uninsured. Use among the AFDC Medicaid population is about the same as use among otherwise similar, privately insured persons. Use rates differ substantially among different Medicaid beneficiary groups, supporting the expectation that some beneficiary groups are in poor health. CONCLUSIONS: Although Medicaid has increased access to health care services for beneficiaries to rates now comparable to those for the privately insured population, because of lower cost sharing in Medicaid we would expect higher service use than we are finding. This suggests possible barriers to Medicaid patients in receiving the care they demand. Enrollment of less healthy individuals into some Medicaid beneficiary groups suggests that pooled purchasing arrangements that include Medicaid populations must be designed to ensure adequate access for the at-risk populations and, at the same time, to ensure that private employers do not opt out because of high community-rated premiums.     

Alcohol,drug abuse,and mental health care for uninsured and insured adults

OBJECTIVE: To compare adults with different insurance coverage in care for alcohol, drug abuse, and mental health (ADM) problems. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: From a national telephone survey of 9,585 respondents. DESIGN: Follow-up of adult participants in the Community Tracking Study. DATA COLLECTION: Self-report survey of insurance plan (Medicare, Medicaid, unmanaged, fully, or partially managed private, or uninsured), ADM need, use of ADM services and treatments, and satisfaction with care in the last 12 months. PRINCIPAL METHODS: Logistic and linear regressions were used to compare persons by insurance type in ADM use. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The likelihood of ADM care was highest under Medicaid and lowest for the uninsured and those under Medicare. Perceived unmet need was highest for the uninsured and lowest under Medicare. Persons in fully rather than partially managed private plans tend to be more likely to have ADM care and ADM treatments given need. Satisfaction with care was high in public plans and low for the uninsured. CONCLUSIONS: The uninsured have the most problems with access to and quality of ADM care, relative to the somewhat comparable Medicaid population. Persons in fully managed plans had better rather than worse access and quality compared to partially managed plans, but findings are exploratory. Despite low ADM use, those with Medicare tend to be satisfied. Across plans, unmet need for ADM care was high, suggesting changes are needed in policy and practice.     

Medicaid Expansion Initiative in Massachusetts: Enrollment Among Substance-Abusing Homeless Adults

Objectives. We assessed whether homeless adults entering substance abuse treatment in Massachusetts were less likely than others to enroll in Medicaid after implementation of the MassHealth Medicaid expansion program in 1997.Methods. We used interrupted time-series analysis in data on substance abuse treatment admissions from the Treatment 0Episode Data Set (1992–2009) to evaluate Medicaid coverage rates in Massachusetts and to identify whether trends differed between homeless and housed participants. We also compared Massachusetts data with data from 17 other states and the District of Columbia combined.Results. The percentage of both homeless and housed people entering treatment with Medicaid increased approximately 21% after expansion (P = .01), with an average increase of 5.4% per year over 12 years (P = .01). The increase in coverage was specific to Massachusetts, providing evidence that the MassHealth policy was the cause of this increase.Conclusions. Findings provide evidence in favor of state participation in the Medicaid expansion in January 2014 under the Affordable Care Act and suggest that hard-to-reach vulnerable groups such as substance-abusing homeless adults are as likely as other population groups to benefit from this policy.Implemented in 1965, Medicaid was designed as publicly funded health insurance coverage for indigent US citizens and legal permanent residents. The program is jointly funded by the state and federal governments, and states are mandated to provide coverage for children younger than 6 years whose family incomes fall below 133%, children between ages 6 and 17 years whose family incomes fall below 100%, and pregnant women whose incomes fall below 133% of the federal poverty level, as defined by the US Department of Health and Human Services1; individuals who are aged, blind, or disabled and who are eligible for Supplemental Security Income; and low-income Medicare beneficiaries. This program has provided health insurance access to a significant number of previously uninsured low-income Americans and continues to be the only route to health care coverage for many people.Nationwide, Medicaid coverage has been found to be associated with several positive outcomes. Medicaid recipients have greater access to medical treatment than uninsured individuals and, therefore, fewer emergency department visits.2–6 Medicaid enrollees have better overall health and lower mortality rates over time than uninsured persons, likely because they have increased access to treatment.7–10 As a result, their medical care is significantly less costly to society, because health problems are more likely to be addressed before the onset of complications and adverse outcomes.11Although the implementation of the Medicaid program has been a largely successful attempt to provide medical insurance, a significant number of low-income adults remain uninsured, mainly because childless adults without qualifying disabilities are ineligible.12–14 In response to this disparity, some states have developed programs to broaden eligibility criteria through a Section 1115 waiver. Massachusetts was among the first states to implement such an initiative, establishing the MassHealth program in July 1997. Among other provisions, the program extended Medicaid eligibility to families and childless adults whose incomes fell below 200% and 133% of the federal poverty level, respectively. MassHealth was jointly funded by the federal and state governments, with Massachusetts paying for roughly 46% of the program.15,16Outcome evaluations of the MassHealth program demonstrated it to be remarkably successful, with significant declines in uninsured rates, particularly among childless adults who would otherwise be ineligible for Medicaid coverage.17,18 Research by Long et al. found that the MassHealth program resulted in a 33% decrease in the rate of uninsured Massachusetts residents.19 Furthermore, Quigley et al. reported that the MassHealth program covers nearly 1 in 6 Massachusetts residents.15 Consequently, it is estimated that only 6% of adults and 3% of children in Massachusetts remained uninsured after implementation of the program.Although evaluations of MassHealth have provided strong support for the program, some evidence suggests that certain marginalized populations are less affected by Medicaid expansion policies than others.16,20 Despite meeting the income eligibility criteria, many people living in poverty remain uninsured because they don''t know they are eligible, they don''t know how to obtain coverage, or they lack any form of identification.21,22 Homeless adults are disproportionately affected by lack of insurance and are reportedly difficult to enroll in public insurance programs.23,24 Although Massachusetts developed several approaches for targeting this hard-to-reach population, evidence suggests that the effort to enroll homeless adults and keep them enrolled faces many logistical barriers.16These challenges are even greater among homeless individuals with substance use disorders. These disorders are common among homeless persons, with prevalence estimates of 40% to 60%.25,26 These individuals generally have significantly greater health care needs, for treatment of, for example, psychiatric disorders, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, hepatitis, liver disease, lung disease, and wound and skin infections.27–30 The premature mortality rate is significantly higher for homeless individuals than for the general population,27,31 and homeless people with substance use disorders are even more disproportionately affected.31,32 Finally, substance abuse is among the strongest predictors of returning to homelessness among formerly homeless individuals.33–36 Therefore, homeless adults'' lack of the Medicaid coverage necessary to obtain treatment is a significant public health concern.Assessing the impact of MassHealth is especially important in the context of national policy initiatives. Currently, many low-income childless adults qualify for Medicaid benefits because of a physical or mental health disability, but substance abuse is not among the conditions that confer eligibility, so many substance-abusing homeless adults who do not have children are ineligible for Medicaid coverage. However, a major provision of the Affordable Care Act is that all individuals with incomes that fall at or below 133% of the federal poverty level will be eligible for Medicaid effective January 2014, irrespective of parental or disability status. Although a Supreme Court ruling in June 2012 rejected a mandate for states to expand coverage,37 it is still expected that a significant portion of individuals with substance use disorders will benefit tremendously from the law''s expanded eligibility.To date, no large-scale quantitative evaluation has attempted to determine whether marginalized population groups, such as homeless substance-abusing adults, still have difficulty obtaining coverage under the Medicaid expansion.16,20–24 Data from state programs such as MassHealth are useful in assessing whether these groups will benefit from Medicaid expansion to the same extent as other population groups or may be in need of targeted interventions to improve their access. We examined administrative data on admissions to substance abuse treatment programs from 1992 to 2009 to assess the uptake of Medicaid coverage by substance-abusing homeless adults after the implementation of MassHealth in 1997. We assessed whether homeless adults entering substance use disorder treatment programs were less likely than housed adults to be covered by Medicaid. To rule out the potential impact of secular trends in national Medicaid coverage, we compared uptake of Medicaid coverage in adults entering substance abuse programs after 1997 in Massachusetts with rates in other states.     

Diabetes and depression care among medicaid beneficiaries

This study evaluates the relationship between diabetes mellitus and depression care among non-elderly Medicaid beneficiaries, using claims data from the 1995 State Medicaid Research Files for Alabama, Georgia, New Jersey, and Wisconsin. Presence of comorbid diabetes was found to be significantly associated with a higher rate of depression diagnosis. Among those who were diagnosed as depressed, treatment of comorbid diabetes was associated with a higher rate of antidepressant treatment than among depression-diagnosed patients who did not also have diabetes. However, among patients with diabetes and depression, a quarter received only tricyclic antidepressants. Controlling for other characteristics, African Americans diagnosed with depression were less likely to receive antidepressant treatment and, if they did receive such treatment, more likely to receive the older tricyclic drugs. These findings raise concern for glycemic control among patients with diabetes and depression treated with tricyclic antidepressants in a low-income Medicaid population. Among depressed Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes, there are racial differences with regard to quality of mental health care in the presence of diabetes.     

The poverty-reducing effect of Medicaid

Medicaid provides health insurance for 54 million Americans. Using the Census Bureau's Supplemental Poverty Measure (which subtracts out-of-pocket medical expenses from family resources), we estimated the impact of eliminating Medicaid. In our counterfactual, Medicaid beneficiaries would become uninsured or gain other insurance. Counterfactual medical expenditures were drawn stochastically from propensity-score-matched individuals without Medicaid. While this method captures the importance of risk protection, it likely underestimates Medicaid's impact due to unobserved differences between Medicaid and non-Medicaid individuals. Nonetheless, we find that Medicaid reduces out-of-pocket medical spending from $871 to $376 per beneficiary, and decreases poverty rates by 1.0% among children, 2.2% among disabled adults, and 0.7% among elderly individuals. When factoring in institutionalized populations, an additional 500,000 people were kept out of poverty. Overall, Medicaid kept at least 2.6 million—and as many as 3.4 million—out of poverty in 2010, making it the U.S.’s third largest anti-poverty program.     

Health care access and use among low-income children: who fares best?

In this paper we assess how access to care and use of services among low-income children vary by insurance status. Although 40 percent of low-income children rely on private health insurance, little is known about how this coverage compares with Medicaid coverage in meeting their health care needs. We find that Medicaid and privately insured low-income children appear to have fairly comparable access but that Medicaid-covered children are more likely to receive services and to have more visits when they receive care. Expanding public coverage may not be sufficient to ensure that all low-income children have access to comprehensive and high-quality care. It may require improvements in preventive and dental care for children with private coverage, an area in which states have limited influence.     

Uninsured Veterans Who Will Need to Obtain Insurance Coverage Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Objectives. We examined the number and clinical needs of uninsured veterans, including those who will be eligible for the Medicaid expansion and health insurance exchanges in 2014.Methods. We analyzed weighted data for 8710 veterans from the 2010 National Survey of Veterans, classifying it by veterans’ age, income, household size, and insurance status.Results. Of 22 million veterans, about 7%, or more than 1.5 million, were uninsured and will need to obtain coverage by enrolling in US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) care or the Medicaid expansion or by participating in the health insurance exchanges. Of those uninsured, 55%, or more than 800 000, are likely eligible for the Medicaid expansion if states implement it. Compared with veterans with any health coverage, those who were uninsured were younger and more likely to be single, Black, and low income and to have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.Conclusions. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is likely to have a considerable impact on uninsured veterans, which may have implications for the VA, the Medicaid expansion, and the health insurance exchanges.The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)1 represents one of the most significant overhauls of the US health care system and is expected to affect millions of uninsured people across the country. Military veterans constitute a particularly important segment of the population because of their service to the country, access to US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care, and other special benefits after their service. However, little has been written on the potential impact of the ACA on the health and health care of veterans.2 Although the VA operates an integrated national health care system that offers free or low-cost services to eligible veterans, many veterans are not enrolled in VA health care, and some are ineligible. Enrollment in VA health care satisfies the ACA’s requirement for insurance coverage, but eligibility for VA health care is determined on the basis of a complex system of priorities, mostly based on service-connected disability, income, and age, and it generally requires a military service discharge that is other than dishonorable (i.e., honorable, general).One study estimated that only 13% (3.6 million) of veterans report receiving some or all of their health care at the VA, and the vast majority (> 20 million) receive no health care from the VA.3 Most veterans thus rely on non-VA health care and are covered by various private or other public forms of health insurance, including Medicare and Medicaid. A small, albeit important, minority of veterans have no health insurance coverage. Estimates based on data from 1987 to 2004 showed that 7.7% of veterans were uninsured (including having no VA coverage), which equates to nearly 1.8 million veterans and represents 4.7% of all uninsured US residents.4Lack of health insurance coverage is an important problem because it can hinder access to effective health care, including needed medical visits, preventive care, and other services, and it can ultimately lead to poor health, premature mortality, and high medical costs.5,6 Being uninsured is a growing problem in the United States that the ACA addresses by requiring virtually all legal US residents to have health insurance. The ACA includes various provisions to help US residents, including veterans, accomplish this.One major provision that is optional for states to implement is the expansion of Medicaid coverage to all individuals aged 18 to 65 years with incomes at or below 138% of the federal poverty level. Although not all states will implement this expansion, and the number of participating states is currently unknown, many poor, uninsured adults will be able to obtain Medicaid coverage in states that implement the Medicaid expansion. Uninsured adults who have incomes above the Medicaid expansion limit or who live in states that do not implement the Medicaid expansion will have to purchase health insurance and may participate in the health insurance exchanges.A second major provision of the ACA is the creation of health insurance exchanges in each state whereby individuals may purchase competitive health insurance plans that are eligible for federal subsidies, but those subsidies are only available to those with income above the federal poverty level. Both of these major ACA provisions are planned for implementation in 2014 and will introduce a variety of coverage options for US residents, including veterans.There has been little study of uninsured veterans and no study of the potential impact of the ACA on veterans in general. Moreover, most data that exist on veterans are based on VA data, which only contain information about veterans who use VA health services and do not include information about those who are uninsured or not covered by VA health care. However, 1 population-based study7 has provided some evidence that a substantial number of veterans are uninsured (particularly those younger than 65 years) and that many uninsured veterans are in poor health, often forego needed health care because of costs, and have equal or worse access to health care than other uninsured adults in the general population. As the country moves toward a new era of health care with the ACA and continues to engage in conflicts in the Middle East, the impact of the ACA on the health care of veterans needs to be considered.We used a recent nationally representative survey of veterans to (1) describe the proportion and characteristics of veterans who are currently uninsured because they will likely be required to obtain coverage under the ACA; (2) determine, among those who are uninsured, who will likely be eligible for the Medicaid expansion; and (3) compare the sociodemographic and health characteristics of those who are uninsured and likely eligible for Medicaid expansion (LEME), those who are uninsured and not LEME, and those who currently have health insurance coverage. The results provide information about the number and health characteristics of veterans who will likely be affected by different provisions of the ACA and inform planning efforts for the VA and states that implement the Medicaid expansion and health insurance exchanges.