Carl Schmid spoke to Synchronicity 2024 about how patients are still often unlawfully charged high copays for PrEP medication and related services covered that should covered with $0 cost-sharing under ACA preventive service protections.
![Key PrEP policy issues impacting access for insured populations](https://hivhep.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Synchronicity-2024-presentation-895x675.png)
Carl Schmid spoke to Synchronicity 2024 about how patients are still often unlawfully charged high copays for PrEP medication and related services covered that should covered with $0 cost-sharing under ACA preventive service protections.
Please RSVP to attend The Role & Impact of the CDC & its Grantees in Ending HIV in the U.S. on Tuesday, June 4th from 3:00-4:30 pm in Rayburn 2060 sponsored by HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute and NASTAD and in cooperation with the Office of Congresswoman Barbara Lee, co-chair of the HIV/AIDS Caucus.
HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute will convene a panel on Friday, April 19, 2024, at the Biomedical HIV Prevention Summit to examine how PrEP is provided today by entities including community health centers, CBOs, pharmacies, telemedicine platforms, and state health departments. We will examine how this work is financed by leveraging existing programs and systems, as well as current barriers and what can be done to close PrEP access gaps in underserved populations.
Carl Schmid joined National Health Law Program’s Wayne Turner, Whitman Walker Institute’s Kellan Baker, and National Women’s Law Center’s Dorianne Mason to discuss what the new section 1157 rule means for health insurance non-discrimination protections at the NAIC Spring Meeting. Carl focused on provisions of the proposed rule that pertain to prescription drugs.
Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, and Bill Sarraille, a partner with Sidley law, speak with Michael Harris, Mercalis’s VP of Patient Support Services Strategy, on the litigation brought by the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute against a federal government rule allowing insurers to not count copay assistance toward patient costs. The Court ruled in favor of patients but the government appealed and is refusing to enforce the Court’s ruling.