POLISCOPE
Back to bills

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
Did Not Advance

Connecticut requires Department of Social Services to phase in Medicaid provider rate increases and consolidate fee schedules by June 2029

Original title: AN ACT CONCERNING MEDICAID RATE INCREASES.

Last action · April 7, 2026: File Number 488Sponsors: Martin Looney and 5 others

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Proposed

The Department of Social Services must phase in Medicaid provider rate increases starting July 1, 2026, ensuring all rates equal at least 75% of Medicare rates or an equivalent regional benchmark by June 30, 2029. The measure also requires the commissioner to consolidate provider fee schedules and mandates ongoing rate reviews by the Council on Medical Assistance Program Oversight.

Why it matters

Increases state expenditures for health care provider reimbursements by an estimated $150 million when fully annualized, altering how medical professionals are compensated for serving Medicaid enrollees.

Who It Would Have Affected

Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

Medicaid providers

Directly affected

Department of Social Services

The department is required to phase in rate increases, consolidate fee schedules, and manage budget impacts.

Directly affected

Council on Medical Assistance Program Oversight

The council must develop an ongoing systemic review of rates and file annual reports with legislative committees.

Key Facts

  • The Department of Social Services commissioner must phase in Medicaid provider rate increases beginning July 1, 2026, and complete the phase-in by June 30, 2029.
  • By June 30, 2029, all Medicaid provider rates must equal at least 75% of recent Medicare rates for the same services, or an equivalent percentage of the five-state rate benchmark.
  • The five-state rate benchmark is the average of rates in Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Oregon.
  • Beginning June 30, 2029, the commissioner must adjust rates annually based on Medicare rates, benchmark percentages, or the Medicare Economic Index.
Show all 8 facts
  • The commissioner must streamline and consolidate existing fee schedules so every provider is reimbursed using the same schedule, incorporating Medicare fee schedules where applicable.
  • The Council on Medical Assistance Program Oversight must develop and implement an ongoing systemic review of reimbursement rates.
  • Starting January 15, 2027, the council must report annually to the Appropriations and Human Services committees with recommendations on necessary appropriations.
  • The fiscal note estimates state costs at approximately $150 million when annualized by the end of the phase-in period.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the five-state rate benchmark used in the bill?
The is the average of rates for the same health care services in Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Oregon.
Who is responsible for reviewing reimbursement rates on an ongoing basis?
The Council on Medical Assistance Program Oversight is required to develop and implement an ongoing systemic review of Medicaid provider reimbursement rates.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Where This Stands

This bill did not become law - Died at adjournment · on the Senate floor.

Procedural history

9 actions
  1. Apr 7, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    File Number 488
  2. Apr 7, 2026Senate
    Senate Calendar Number 300
  3. Apr 7, 2026Senate
    Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate
  4. Apr 7, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners' Office
  5. Mar 30, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Referred to Office of Legislative Research and Office of Fiscal Analysis 04/07/26 12:00 PM
  6. Mar 20, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Filed with Legislative Commissioners' Office
Show 3 earlier actions
  1. Mar 19, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Joint Favorable
  2. Mar 13, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Public Hearing 03/17
  3. Mar 12, 2026Connecticut General AssemblyCommittee
    Referred to Joint Committee on Human Services

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Discoveries

1 pattern noticed across the record

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

financial connection95% confidence

Estimated Multi-Year State Fiscal Impact

The fiscal note projects state costs reaching approximately $150 million when annualized by fiscal year 2029 due to phased-in rate benchmarks.

Connected Entities

Massachusetts, Oregon, New Jersey and 5 more
locationMassachusetts“Included in the five-state rate benchmark group.”Map →
locationOregon“Included in the five-state rate benchmark group.”Map →
locationNew Jersey“Included in the five-state rate benchmark group.”Map →
locationNew York“Included in the five-state rate benchmark group.”Map →
OrganizationDepartment of Social Services“Commissioned the Medicaid rate study and tasked with phasing in rate increases.”Map →
OrganizationCouncil on Medical Assistance Program Oversight“Required to develop an ongoing systemic review of Medicaid provider reimbursemen”Map →
OrganizationCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services“Calculates the Medicare Economic Index.”Map →
locationMaine“Included in the five-state rate benchmark group.”Map →

Sources

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance20
    Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 75)
  • Controversy20
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz35
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record