S. 551 would amend Title XVIII to allow the Secretary to apply a cost-of-living adjustment to the non-labor portion of payments for hospital outpatient department services in Alaska and Hawaii, beginning for services on or after January 1, 2026. The adjustment uses the same mechanism as the existing COLA under the hospital prospective payment system, but the bill explicitly states that the adjustment shall not be budget neutral.
The aim is to account for the unique cost environments in remote states and help rural outpatient facilities maintain access to care.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill adds a new paragraph to section 1833(t) authorizing the Secretary to adjust the non-labor portion of Medicare outpatient payments for hospital OPD services furnished in Alaska and Hawaii, starting in 2026, in a manner analogous to the current COLA mechanism.
Who It Affects
Medicare-covered hospital outpatient departments in Alaska and Hawaii, along with CMS program administrators who implement payment adjustments and oversee compliance.
Why It Matters
It recognizes geographic cost differences and seeks to preserve outpatient access in remote states by ensuring non-labor costs are adequately compensated.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill makes a targeted adjustment to how Medicare pays hospital outpatient departments in Alaska and Hawaii. Specifically, it adds a new provision to the Social Security Act that lets the Secretary modify the non-labor portion of outpatient payments for services provided in those two states.
The adjustment would be implemented the same way as the existing cost-of-living adjustment used in the outpatient payment framework, but it would not be budget neutral, meaning it could increase overall Medicare outlays for these facilities. The change would apply to services furnished on or after January 1, 2026, and is intended to better reflect the higher operating costs borne by rural and remote hospitals in AK and HI.
The bill does not alter labor costs or overall program design beyond enabling this targeted COLA. In practice, CMS would determine the size of the adjustment and periodically update it, subject to the statutory constraints in the statute.
The ultimate goal is to sustain access to outpatient care for residents of Alaska and Hawaii by ensuring that payment levels cover non-labor expenses more accurately in these geographies.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill creates a new paragraph (23) in Section 1833(t) to authorize a COLA for the non-labor portion of OPD payments in AK and HI.
The adjustment follows the same mechanism used for other COLA adjustments under Medicare’s outpatient payment rules.
The adjustment is explicitly not budget neutral, implying higher Medicare expenditures.
Effective date is for OPD services furnished on or after January 1, 2026.
The Secretary would implement and administer the adjustment, similar to existing COLA processes under current law.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short Title
The bill designates the act as the “Ensuring Outpatient Quality for Rural States Act.” This naming provision signals the policy focus on supporting outpatient services in rural or remote states. It is a formal designation that accompanies the substantive amendment in Section 2.
Application of COLA to non-labor portion for AK/HI OPD services
Section 1833(t) of the Social Security Act is amended by adding new paragraph (23). This paragraph authorizes the Secretary to provide adjustments to the non-labor portion of payment amounts for covered hospital outpatient department services furnished in Alaska and Hawaii for services on or after January 1, 2026. The adjustment is to be made in the same manner as the COLA applied to non-labor portions under section 1886(d)(5)(H) and is explicitly not to be budget neutral. The provision establishes a mechanism to address the higher and unique operating costs in AK and HI while maintaining the general framework of the Medicare outpatient payment system.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Rural hospital outpatient departments in Alaska and Hawaii, which can receive higher non-labor payments to reflect local operating costs and sustain service availability.
- Hospital CFOs and financial officers in AK/HI, who gain clearer revenue support to cover non-labor costs.
- CMS and the Secretary’s office, which gains statutory authority to implement targeted adjustments within the Medicare outpatient framework.
- Alaska and Hawaii hospital associations and rural health advocates, who gain a policy tool to address geographic cost disparities.
Who Bears the Cost
- Increase in Medicare outpatient payments for AK/HI facilities, representing higher federal outlays.
- Administrative costs for CMS to implement, monitor, and periodically adjust the AK/HI COLA mechanism.
- Longer-term fiscal impact to the Medicare program funded by federal sources and taxpayers, due to non-budget-neutral adjustment.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether to expand Medicare payments for non-labor costs in AK and HI to reflect geographic cost differences, knowing this will raise federal outlays and require ongoing administration, versus maintaining a uniform national payment rate and risking reduced access to outpatient services in remote areas.
The provision creates a targeted remedy for AK and HI outpatient non-labor costs, but it also shifts some costs from a neutral to a non-neutral footing. The bill does not specify a funding offset or cap and relies on the Secretary’s implementation within the existing COLA framework.
This raises questions about the magnitude of the adjustment, whether partitions between AK and HI will be identical, and how frequently the adjustment would be recalibrated. In practice, the accessibility gains in remote areas hinge on accurate cost reporting and timely updates to reflect changing operating costs.
A key policy tension is geographic equity versus overall program cost. While the adjustment aims to preserve outpatient access in remote states, it increases Medicare expenditures and requires ongoing CMS administration to ensure consistency and prevent abuse or misapplication.
There is also potential variability in how hospitals in these states experience the adjustment depending on local cost structures and patient mix.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.