Showing posts with label The AIDS Institute. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The AIDS Institute. Show all posts

Thursday, February 19, 2026

Florida, Once Again, Imperils the Lives of People Living with HIV/AIDS

By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Health Policy Lead Consultant, ADAP Advocacy

The state of Florida is in the process of revamping [deconstructing] its state’s AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) to exclude nearly half of its current enrollees. That plan hit a roadblock when the Florida Department of Health ignored the state statutes governing administrative procedure, which opened it to an administrative action filed by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF). The state withdrew its proposal but plans to proceed with it…this time, actually following the rules. It represents a temporary win, but much work remains to be done to protect Floridians living with HIV/AIDS reliant on the program. The Florida Legislature appears to be taking steps to address the crisis, as both the House and Senate budget proposals call for additional funding for the drug assistance program. The Senate's budget proposal includes $118 million, while the House's plan offers only $68 million, which represents about half of the funding needed.

How This Started

The emails started circulating on January 7th, 2026 (see Figure 1):

Email from service provider to clients
Figure 1 - Email from an ASO

“ADAP will reduce its [Federal Poverty Level (FPL)] eligibility from 400% to 100%.”

“[Co-pay] assistance will only be provided to participants who meet the new eligibility criteria.”

“ADAP-funded insurance coverage will be discontinued.”

“Only generic medications will be covered.” *

And the panic began.

State and national organizations across the country immediately began to both panic and organize:

How can we best support patients who will lose access to their medications, as well as organizations that may face closure as a result of these changes?

The State of Florida Confirms Its Plans

By Thursday, January 8th, 2026, the state of Florida clarified its plans:

Dear Colleagues,

As you are probably aware, ADAP will be moving to a financially sustainable model to benefit the largest population of ADAP clients. We will continue to support the current model (direct dispense, CVS Caremark and insurance) for a two month period to ensure ADAP clients have ample time to seek insurance and medication assistance, if no longer eligible to receive ADAP services through the department. Following this transition period, we will move to direct medication dispensing, capping the eligible federal poverty level at 130%, as well as implementing ADAP formulary changes starting March 1, 2026.

Regarding the formulary changes, Biktarvy will be removed and Descovy will be restricted to only those with renal insufficiency (CrCl <60). All other current ART medications including Tivicay will be available. However, we will monitor cost closely and adjust if needed. A few actions to consider:

  • Upon follow up visits, transition to new ART regimen such as Tivicay plus Truvada, other Truvada-based or NRTI-based regimen in combination with integrase inhibitors, or alternative class outside of integrase inhibitors. Please refer to the treatment guidelines: Initiation of Antiretroviral Therapy | NIH.
  • For patients on those Biktarvy or Descovy, ensure they have adequate medication until their next clinical visit prior to March 1st.
  • For Descovy, providers are required to document the reason: due to CrCl <60 or renal insufficiency on the prescription note section.

Will keep you posted on any additional changes. As always, please reach out if you have any questions.

{Source: U. Choe, personal communication, January 06, 2026}.

So, What Happened?

Florida’s controversial Surgeon General, Joseph Ladapo, stated that the cuts were necessary to prevent a “…projected $120 million shortfall” (Shepard, 2026), but state and national advocates are asking whether or not taxpayer dollars have been illegally diverted or misappropriated (Adamczeski, 2026), pointing to a recent investigation that uncovered the DeSantis Administration’s diversion of $35 million in taxpayer dollars to wage campaigns against two ballot initiatives that would have legalized recreational marijuana use (Amendment 3) and overturned the six-week abortion ban passed by the state legislature (Amendment 4; Mower et al., 2025).

What Happened Next?

Shortly after these announcements, ADAP Advocacy remained publicly quiet, but behind the scenes, it was working on two fronts to help alleviate growing concern. One route has political ties to the governor, while the other option involves potential litigation. That is all the organization has been authorized to say at this time.

AHF almost immediately filed an administrative legal action, arguing that the state of Florida failed to comply with mandatory public rulemaking processes that require it to publish a “Notice of Proposed Rule” (NPR).

Publishing an NPR starts a mandatory 21-day procedural clock during which the public may submit written comments, requests for public hearings, workshop requests, and “lower-cost regulatory alternatives” (LCRAs).

The state of Florida issued this NPR on Wednesday, February 11th.

What This Would Mean for People Living with HIV/AIDS in Florida

The “cost-containment” measures announced by the Florida Department of Health are each, by themselves, draconian cuts that would have devastating negative impacts on People Living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in the state.

In its NPR, Florida proposes the following changes to the program:

Lowering the Income Eligibility Threshold from 400% of the FPL to 130% of the FPL:

In 2023, there were an estimated 123,279 PLWHA in the state of Florida, of whom 36,834 (29.9%) were enrolled in Florida’s state ADAP program (National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors, 2025).

Should Florida move ahead with its plan to lower its income eligibility cap to 130%—roughly $20,345 / year for an individual—potentially up to half of patients currently enrolled (between 16,000-20,000 PLWHA) would be disenrolled (Figure 2).

Figure 2 – Florida State ADAP Enrollees by Percentage of the Federal Poverty Level, 2024

Figure 3
Photo Source: ADAP Advocacy

For context, capping income eligibility at 130% would make Florida one of just 4 state ADAPs with income eligibility caps below 300% of the FPL, along with Utah (250%), Texas, and Oklahoma (both 200%; ADAP Advocacy, 2025).

Significant and Potentially Deadly Changes to the ADAP Formulary:

ADAP rules currently require that ADAP formularies include at least one medication from each class of core antivirals. The NPR issued by the state of Florida eliminates this language altogether.

Patients who remain eligible for ADAP would face significant restrictions on the medications they can take. As detailed in the email from the Florida Department of Health, the most popular and commonly prescribed medication to treat HIV/AIDS, Biktarvy, will be removed from the formulary.

Biktarvy, a single-pill oral regimen made by Gilead Sciences, is taken by over 430,000 people living with HIV in the United States (Gilead Sciences, 2026), or 35.8% of PLWHA.

By removing Biktarvy from the ADAP formulary, the Florida state government will be forcing impacted patients to transition off of the medications that are the standard of care to older, less effective multi-pill regimens in order to “contain costs.”

While this initial statement has been removed from the NPR, AHF has advised state advocates that the Florida Department of Health is separately attempting to restrict access to Biktarvy and Descovy through an informal policy outside the rulemaking process.

Dismantling the Health Insurance Premium Plus and Marketplace Premium Assistance framework:

Additionally, Florida’s plan includes discontinuing health insurance continuation payments for ADAP clients. Insurance continuation is a process that allows state ADAPs to pay for various aspects of private health insurance coverage, including those plans made available to patients on the Health Insurance Marketplace under the Affordable Care Act, and the vast majority of state ADAPs participate in some form of insurance continuation purchasing, be that through premium assistance, paying deductibles, and/or paying co-pays (Figures 3-5).

Figure 3 – State ADAP Programs That Pay Private/Marketplace Insurance Premiums, 2023

Figure 3
Photo Source: ADAP Advocacy

Figure 4 – State ADAP Programs That Pay Private/Marketplace Insurance Deductibles, 2023

Figure 4
Photo Source: ADAP Advocacy

Figure 5 – State ADAP Programs That Pay Private/Marketplace Insurance Co-Pays, 2023

Figure 5
Photo Source: ADAP Advocacy

In the recently filed NPR, Florida significantly narrows this framework by limiting the program to medication co-pay and deductible assistance through a limited number of contracted pharmacies.

Eliminating Part A information sharing in an effort to implement artificial administrative barriers:

Another change announced in the NPR is the removal of Ryan White Part A programs from the definition of who can issue a “Notice of Eligibility” (NOE), and the elimination of the provision that allowed Part A NOEs to satisfy ADAP (Part B) eligibility requirements.

For the uninitiated, Part A of the Ryan White Cares Act funds grants to Eligible Metropolitan Areas (EMAs) and Transitional Grant Areas (TGAs)—areas of the country with populations of at least 50,000 people that have seen between 1,000 and 2,000 AIDS diagnoses in the most recent five years.

Florida’s proposed change would require every Part A client to qualify separately for ADAP services, resulting in additional paperwork and administrative costs that increase the risk of lapses in coverage, administrative delays, and missed doses or treatment abandonment. Because of the nature of the HIV virus, missed doses or abandoning treatment can result in the mutation of the virus, creating drug-resistant strains. Lapsed treatment also assures that viral suppression will evaporate, increasing the risk of outbreaks of a multi-drug resistant strain of HIV.

Administrative burdens are a common tool used by public (in this case, the state of Florida) and private (e.g., insurance companies) payers to increase the likelihood that otherwise eligible program applicants will abandon application and/or renewal processes.

For example, in 2021, in an effort to artificially reduce its ADAP enrollment numbers, the state of Texas began requiring enrollees to recertify their eligibility in person. This was when the COVID-19 pandemic was still killing thousands of Americans each day, making this requirement potentially deadly to a patient population at severe risk of developing potentially deadly opportunistic infections, solely to serve the state’s goal of decreasing the number of enrollees to “save money.”

Limiting the types of documents acceptable for income verification:

In addition to these changes, the state of Florida is further creating administrative barriers by limiting the types of documents that can be used to verify income eligibility. This change would limit the documents available for use to W-2s, tax returns, pay stubs, unemployment documents, and Medicaid award letters.

This creates a barrier for gig workers (e.g., DoorDash drivers, Uber drivers, contractors), people paid directly in cash, and others with informal financial support by preventing them from submitting Form 1099s, contracts, or other income documents.

Changing program language to eliminate prioritization criteria, waitlist rules, and notice requirements:

Another change introduced in Florida’s NPR would revise the standard language about all program enrollment and services being subject to the availability of funds to exclude additional language that detailed prioritization criteria, rules related to the creation of a waitlist, or notice to enrollees that their coverage may or will be eliminated should funds be reduced or unavailable.

This essentially means the state can simply cease services without providing enrollees with sufficient notice to seek alternative patient assistance.

What Can Advocates Do?

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation has recommended that individuals and organizations follow the following strategy:

Figure 6 – What You Should Do Right Now

Figure 6
Photo Source: AHF

{Source: AIDS Healthcare Foundation, 2026}

Individuals may also directly contact their legislators using the resources below:

To find your representative in the Florida House of Representatives:

https://www.flhouse.gov/FindYourRepresentative

To find your representative in the Florida Senate:

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/Find

This Friday (February 20th) at 9 am ET, advocates can join a HIV Patient Access and Advocacy Strategy Convening, hosted by The AIDS Institute. 

In the meantime, ADAP Advocacy announced this week that it is rescinding its three-year travel ban to the state of Florida. This travel ban applied to ADAP board members, staff, consultants, and scholarship-funded patient advocates and precluded hosting any patient advocacy events, such as Fireside Chats, in Florida.

The severity of potential outcomes for PLWHA in the state of Florida “…warrant[s] our change in strategy,” said ADAP Advocacy CEO Brandon M. Macsata. ADAP Advocacy will continue to monitor this situation and will report any additional information as it becomes available.

*This restriction hasn't appeared in any of the formal notices, despite it initially being floated by the state.

Disclaimer: Guest blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the ADAP Advocacy Association, but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about public health-related issues and updates.

References:

[1] Adamczeski, R. (2026, January 20). Ron DeSantis will have 'blood on his hands' if HIV funding isn't restored, Democratic chair says. Los Angeles, CA: The Advocate: Politics. https://www.advocate.com/politics/florida-desantis-hiv-medication-funding

[2] ADAP Advocacy. (2025). ADAP Directory. Nags Head, NC: ADAP Advocacy. https://adap.directory/directory

[3] Gilead Sciences. (2026). Biktarvy. Foster City, CA: Gilead Sciences: Biktarvy: About Biktarvy. https://www.biktarvy.com/about-biktarvy

[4] Mower, L., Glorioso, A., & Garcia, J. (2026, January 19). DeSantis admin diverted child welfare and medical funds for consultants, ads. Miami, FL: Miami Herald: News: Florida Politics. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article313630394.html

[5] National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors. (2025). 2025 Annual Report. Washington, DC: NASTAD. https://nastad.org/2025-rwhap-part-b-adap-monitoring-report

[6] Shepard, S. (2026, January 21). New Florida AIDS drug rules may leave 15,000 without HIV treatment options, Democrats say. West Palm Beach, FL: CBS 12: News: Local. https://cbs12.com/news/local/floridas-revised-hiv-treatment-eligibility-raises-questions-from-democratic-lawmakers-south-florida-news-ryan-white-aids-drug-assistance-program-adap-reps-lois-frankel-debbie-wasserman-schultz-and-sheila-cherfilusmccormick-zoom-meeting-january-21-2026

Thursday, May 6, 2021

Co-Pay Accumulators are an Extremely Dangerous, Anti-Patient Policy

By: Brandon M. Macsata, CEO, ADAP Advocacy Association

Today's lexicon outside healthcare policy discussions probably doesn't include the words, co-pay accumulators. But that is slowly changing as more and more people encounter what is widely recognized as an extremely anti-patient health insurance policy. Co-pay accumulators amount to nothing more than the greedy health insurance industry (and other payers) making prescription drug coverage less affordable for patients, especially for those living with chronic health conditions such as HIV/AIDS.

The Hepatitis B Foundation defines a copay accumulator (or accumulator adjustment program) as "a strategy used by insurance companies and Pharmacy Benefits Managers (PBMs) that stop manufacturer copay assistance coupons from counting towards two things: 1) the deductible and 2) the maximum out-of-pocket spending."[1]

Last year in the ADAP Blog, guest contributor Marcus J. Hopkins provided an excellent description on these potentially harmful policies: "Essentially, what a co-pay accumulator attempts to do is increase the amount of money consumers pay in order to decrease the amount of money insurers have to pay, once their annual deductible and/or Out-of-Pocket Maximum (OPM) is met. When consumers are allowed to count co-pay assistance cards against their deductible/OPM, they reach those limits sooner, meaning that insurers are then on the hook for every pharmaceutical fill after that date."[2]

Photo Source: Bankrate

Co-pay accumulators are particularly problematic for the HIV community because they rely on specialty drugs, such as anti-retroviral medications. In 2018, Dr. Adam J. Fein with the Drug Channels Institute warned, "Patients today are being asked to pay a significant share of prescription costs for more-expensive specialty drugs, because of high coinsurance amounts."[3]

Unfortunately, increasingly health insurance companies and PBMs have elected to institute co-pay accumulators. Make no mistake about it, but these co-pay accumulators will lead to patients being unable to afford their medication...and that will lead to less medication adherence...and that will lead to higher costs for the entire healthcare system. Our response is simple: It is time to advocate for the patient!

The AIDS Institute recently published an in-depth report, "Double Dipping: Insurance Companies Profit at Patients' Expense - An Updated Report on Copay Accumulators." According to the report's findings, in 45 states and the District of Columbia, there is at least one plan with a copay accumulator adjustment policy.[4]

For people living with chronic health conditions, such as HIV or viral hepatitis, co-pay accumulators generally pose significant problems for patients. As the report highlights: "With the many crises plaguing our health care system today, this very confusing issue can easily be dismissed. However, for the patients it affects, it simply cannot be ignored. And for those who haven’t experienced a copay accumulator yet, it may only be a matter of time."[5]

The problem for patients is much broader, though. According to the Patient Access Network Foundation (PAN), more than 10 percent of seniors shared that they took on credit card debt to afford prescriptions, while nearly 20 percent of seniors said they reduced spending on everyday purchases, including groceries and transportation.[6]

The patient pays less
Photo Source: PAN Foundation

The Biden-Harris Administration recently had the opportunity to pump the brakes on co-pay accumulators, similar to the way they stopped the harmful demonstration project designed to weaken the six protected drug classes under Medicare's Part D. They failed to so, and the patient advocacy community was quick to express its concern.

“We are deeply disappointed that CMS passed on addressing the issue of copay assistance for prescription drugs and requiring insurers and pharmacy benefit managers to count assistance towards patient out-of-pocket cost-sharing and deductibles,” commented Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute. “Even before COVID-19, patients were struggling to afford their medications and relied on copay assistance from drug manufacturers. Now, the need is even greater. We know that the Biden-Harris administration wants to improve patient affordability of healthcare, particularly for vulnerable communities; however, they missed a perfect opportunity to demonstrate this commitment.”[7]

In a recent letterU.S. Representatives A. Donald McEachin (VA-04) and Rodney Davis (IL-13) asked President Biden to halt the Trump Administration's copay accumulator policy ― which was included in the 2021 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters (NBPP).[8] It is now left in the hands of the Congress to reverse course on the extremely dangerous, anti-patient policy known as co-pay accumulators. Patient health depends on it!

[1] Hepatitis B Foundation (2020, March 4). Copay Accumulators – What They Are and What They Mean For Your Prescriptions. Retrieved online at https://www.hepb.org/blog/copay-accumulators-mean-prescriptions/#:~:text=A%20copay%20accumulator%20–%20or%20accumulator%20adjustment%20program,the%20deductible%20and%202%29%20the%20maximum%20out-of-pocket%20spending.

[2] Marcus J. Hopkins (2020, July 16). CMS Co-Pay Accumulator Rule Aims to Increase Consumer Costs. The ADAP Blog. ADAP Advocacy Association. Retrieved online at https://adapadvocacyassociation.blogspot.com/2020/07/cms-co-pay-accumulator-rule-aims-to.html.

[3] Adam J. Fein, Ph.D. (2018, January 3). Copay Accumulators: Costly Consequences of a New Cost-Shifting Pharmacy Benefit. Drug Channels. Retrieved online at https://www.drugchannels.net/2018/01/copay-accumulators-costly-consequences.html.

[4] The AIDS Institute (March 2021). Double Dipping: Insurance Companies Profit at Patients' Expense - An Updated Report on Copay Accumulators. Retrieved online at https://aidsinstitute.net/documents/2021_TAI_Double-Dipping_Final-031621.pdf.

[5] The AIDS Institute (March 2021). Double Dipping: Insurance Companies Profit at Patients' Expense - An Updated Report on Copay Accumulators. Retrieved online at https://aidsinstitute.net/documents/2021_TAI_Double-Dipping_Final-031621.pdf.

[6] Amy Niles (2021, April 19). Morning Consult survey: high out-of-pocket costs causing concern for seniors. PAN Foundation. Retrieved online at https://www.panfoundation.org/high-out-of-pocket-costs-causing-concern-for-seniors/. 

[7] Carl Schmid (2021, April 30). Biden Administration Passes on Protecting Patient Affordability of Medications. HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute. Retrieved online at https://hivhep.org/press-releases/biden-administration-passes-on-protecting-patient-affordability-of-medications/.  

[8] The Honorable A. Donald McEachin (2021, March 22). McEachin Leads Bipartisan Letter Asking President Biden to Reverse Previous Administration’s Copay Accumulator Policy. The Office of U.S. Representative A. Donald McEachin (VA-04). Retrieved online at https://mceachin.house.gov/media/press-releases/mceachin-leads-bipartisan-letter-asking-president-biden-reverse-previous.

Disclaimer: Guest blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the ADAP Advocacy Association, but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about public health-related issues and updates.

Thursday, May 14, 2020

Bad Medicine Prescribed by the Trump Administration, Putting Health Insurers before Patients

By: Brandon M. Macsata, CEO, ADAP Advocacy Association

Earlier this week the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ("CMS") issued the final Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for the 2021 benefit year, also referred to as the 2021 Payment Notice. CMS hailed the announcement as continuing "the Trump Administration's efforts to promote affordability, improve consumer choice, ensure program integrity, and increase market stability," yet it was met with strong criticism from the patient advocacy community. The ADAP Advocacy Association blasted the Trump Administration for putting the deep pockets of the health insurance industry before the needs of patients living with chronic health conditions, such as HIV/AIDS.

Money and Prescription Drugs
Photo Source: Patients Rising Now

Most troubling for patients is the decision allowing health insurance companies to disallow drug manufacturer co-pay assistance programs towards patient out-of-pocket cost sharing and deductibles.
Co-pay savings programs are offered by drugmakers, thereby reducing out-of-pocket costs for patients. Some programs, such as co-pay coupons are typically for "expensive, brand name drugs without a generic equivalent" (Chase, 2019).

According to a statement issued by Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, "In 2018, drug manufacturer copay assistance totaled $13 billion, according to data from IQVIA. The new rule is a complete reversal of the administration's policy announced last year that required copay assistance to count for brand name drugs that do not have a generic."

That sentiment was echoed by Bill Remak, chair of the International Association of Hepatitis Task Forces: "This is a major setback for patients living with viral hepatitis and related diseases and will effectively raise patient costs and reduce access to critical medications. On behalf of the millions of people living with viral hepatitis, we urge the Trump Administration to reverse this rule and not adopt policies that do not count copay assistance toward their deductible and annual out-of-pocket limit. With the COVID-19 pandemic, this move creates even more barriers preventing patients from getting the medications they need."

CANN Tweet

Twitter also was filled with condemnation from the patient advocacy community, including rebukes from the Community Access National Network (CANN) and The AIDS Institute.

The AIDS Institute Tweet

The PAN Foundation warned disallowing co-pay accumulator programs will hurt vulnerable patients by shifting the cost burden over to them.

According to Patients Rising Now ("PRN"), "patient assistance programs are providing free medications, expanding patient support services and increasing access to care as a way to help millions of patients struggling to pay the bills during the COVID-19 pandemic." PRN characterized the decision by CMS as flawed and asked that they reconsider the final rule.

The All Copays Count Coalition - representing a broad spectrum of patient groups - sent a letter to HHS Secretary Azar prior to the final rule urging HHS to reconsider the co-pay provision. It obviously fell on deaf ears because the Trump Administration sided with the greedy health insurers rather than the patients who need the financial assistance.

A copy of the 2020 Final Payment Notice can be downloaded online: https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/press-releases/cms-announces-final-payment-notice-2021-coverage-year.

References:
  • Chase, Lauren (2019, September 16). What Are Manufacturer Copay Cards? GoodRx. Retrieved online at https://www.goodrx.com/blog/what-are-manufacturer-copay-cards/. 
  • Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (2020, May 7). CMS Announces Final Payment Notice for 2021 Coverage Year. Retrieved online at https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/press-releases/cms-announces-final-payment-notice-2021-coverage-year.
  • Remak, Bill (2020, May 8). On May 7, 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released its final 2021 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters rule. LinkedIn. Retrieved online at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/may-7-2020-centers-medicare-medicaid-services-cms-released-bill-remak/.
  • Schmid, Carl (2020, May 7). Trump Administration Shocks Patients By Allowing Insurers to Increase Cost of Prescription Drugs. HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute.
Disclaimer: Guest blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the ADAP Advocacy Association, but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about public health-related issues and updates.

Thursday, April 5, 2018

Rhode Island Advocates Score 'YUGE' Victory Against Insurance Company Gimmicks

By: Brandon M. Macsata, CEO, ADAP Advocacy Association

Last month, advocates in the Ocean State fought back against proposed legislation in the Rhode Island General Assembly that would have prohibited patients from utilizing manufacturer coupons and drug discount cards to lower their out-of-pocket drug costs. S.2532 was a thinly veiled threat orchestrated by the insurance companies and other private health plan payers, which would have resulted in patients paying more for their prescription drugs. Such gimmicks disproportionately impact people living with chronic health conditions who rely on specialty drugs, such as HIV/AIDS or Hepatitis C.

Welcome to Rhode Island, The Ocean State

In early March the legislation was introduced in the Rhode Island General Assembly and referred to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee. The Committee, however, ultimately recommended the measure be held for further study after strong pushback from the HIV community (and others).

On March 27th, opponents testified against S.2532 during a hearing convened by the Committee. The HIV Health Care Access Working Group (HHCAWG)  which is part of the Federal AIDS Policy Partnership (FAPP)  also sent a letter opposing S.2532, and the state legislators took notice.

Manufacturer coupons and drug discount cards, commonly known as accumulator adjustment programs, were highlighted in a recent ADAP Blog, "Rx Drug Coupon Concerns Pit Prices Against Patients." The smoke and mirrors being perpetrated against patients is fueled by the insurance industry's misinformation, as well as their hopes that most patients don't take the time to read, and let alone understand, their policy documents.

Have you heard of the copay accumulator?
Photo Source: Patients Rising

The AIDS Institute (TAI) has been actively monitoring efforts by insurance companies to restrict access to care and treatment for people living with HIV/AIDS  including efforts to limit accumulator adjustment programs. Carl Schmid, TAI's Deputy Executive Director, summarized concerns over limiting such programs:
“It is already difficult for people living with HIV and others who want to take PrEP to access their medications due to insurance benefit practices such as high co-insurance and deductibles, this will just compound the situation. It is time for us to be loud and strong, and fight back. People lives are on the line.”
What happened in Rhode Island was a victory for people living with HIV/AIDS, as well as patients in general. But this issue isn't going away any time soon.  The ADAP Advocacy Association has expressed strong concern over the ongoing gimmicks by the insurance industry and health plan payers on this policy issue.

Related articles of potential interest: