Colorado Health Insurance Exchange Consumer Focus Groups

1. Colorado Health Insurance ExchangeConsumer Focus Groups Adela Flores-Brennan Colorado Center on Law and Policy afbrennan@cclponline.org 303.573.5669 x313

2. Background • First phase of a five phase project to engage consumers in implementation of the COHBE • Multiple partners (CCLP, CCHI, CoPIRG, John Snow, Inc.) • Targeted individuals without large group coverage • Targeted individuals with incomes from 133 up to 400 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL)

3. Methodology • Qualitative data gathering through targeted focus groups • Varied geographic participation (rural and urban) • Three tiered recruitment process • Screening process prior to participation • Focus groups were conducted using consistent guidelines

4. Process • Focus groups occurred throughout Colorado (one interview) • Denver, Grand Junction, Sterling, Greeley, Pueblo • One Denver focus group in Spanish • 70 participants in eight focus group sessions (participation ranged from four to 19 per session) • Diversity in gender, age, race, ethnicity, education, and income were represented

5. Issues explored • Expectations • Choice • Access • Integration • Appeal and marketing

6. Findings: Expectations • The Exchange should be easy to use, allowing quick and understandable comparisons of similar aspects of different health insurance plans. • The Exchange should contain costs. • The Exchange should ensure a high level of accountability and transparency. • The Exchange should be an unbiased source. • The Exchange should help consumers understand difficult concepts and should provide for consumer reviews.

7. Findings: Choice • Participants interpret the concept of choice in very different ways. • The Exchange should provide highly individualized selection based affordability, family size and/or health care needs. • Selections pulled from a wide range of choices. • Cost is primary selection criteria followed by benefits. • Geographic variation: western slope wanted more options within region; in Sterling participants wanted to go outside region.

8. Findings: Integration • Some mixed opinions about accessing public benefits. • Most think it makes sense to direct consumers to Medicaid eligibility if appropriate. • Less consensus on other public benefits—some thought it would be a good service for customers, others thought it was beyond the scope.

9. Findings: Access • Most would access the Exchange on line, but • Live, on phone or in person support from highly knowledgeable individuals is critical. • Opinions varied as to who people trust to help them navigate their Exchange experience.

10. Findings: Marketing/Outreach • Effective, frequent, culturally appropriate and varied marketing techniques will play a key role in ensuring that individuals are aware of the Exchange. • Consistent, prominent, frequent messages. • Trusted messengers: providers, clinics, schools, libraries and community organizations for information.

11. Findings: Marketing/Outreach • Tax credits that help pay for premium or help customers buy up will attract customers. • Ease of use promise will attract customers. • Highly tailored plan options will attract customers. • Successful experiences will generate good work of mouth and attract customers.

12. Marketing/Outreach: book mobiles and digital TV • Ideas for reaching customers: • Analog to digital • Book mobiles • Health care access points • Community forums/”career fairs” • Broadcast Exchange information hour