The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.52.7.943

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the prevalence and nature of behavioral health carve-out contracts among Fortune 500 firms in 1997. METHODS: A survey was conducted of 498 companies that were listed as Fortune 500 firms in 1994 or 1995. A total of 336 firms (68 percent) responded to the survey. Univariate analyses were used to analyze prevalence, types, and amounts of covered services, cost sharing, and benefit limits. A total of 132 firms reported contracting with managed behavioral health organizations; 124 firms answered benefits questions about covered services, cost-sharing levels, and annual and lifetime limits. RESULTS: Most of the plans covered a broad range of services. Cost sharing was typically required, and for inpatient care it was often substantial. Fifteen percent of the firms offered mental health benefits that were below the limits defined in this study as minimal benefit levels, and 34 percent offered substance abuse treatment benefits that fell below minimal levels. The most generous mental health benefits and substance abuse treatment benefits, defined as no limits or a lifetime limit only of $1 million or more, were offered by 31 percent and 20 percent of the firms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The carve-out contracts of the Fortune 500 firms in this study typically covered a wide range of services, and the benefits appeared generous relative to those reported for other integrated and carve-out plans. However, these benefits generally did not reach the level of parity with typical medical benefits, nor did they fully protect enrollees from the risk of catastrophic expenditures.