We discuss the rationale for benefit carve-out contracts in general and for mental health and substance abuse in particular. We focus on the control of adverse selection as a principal explanation and find that this is consistent with the wide-spread use of sole-source contracting with periodic rebidding. We also find that some degree of risk sharing is common; we interpret this as a method of balancing cost-containment incentives with incentives to maintain access and quality on unmeasured dimensions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Richard G. Frank (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: