PHILADELPHIA (KYW Newsradio) — Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Keystone First have reached a new multi-year contract that ensures children covered by Medicaid can still receive treatment at the pediatric center.
This issue between CHOP and Keystone was the cost of various services. The existing contract would have expired on July 1, which would have prompted parents who rely on CHOP to switch insurers.
“[It’s] definitely a relief,” said Leslie Proffitt, who expressed relief that she won’t have to change insurance companies. “I've spoken to quite a few families this morning, and everyone is feeling incredibly relieved that this isn't the next fight that they have to make for their child, that they can stay with their insurance plan, and continue to go to CHOP.”
Her 14-year-old daughter Lily Ciechoski has been going to CHOP nearly her entire life to receive specialized care for spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy and epilepsy. The new deal ensures Lily will continue to receive needed therapy and treatments from the specialists at CHOP.
Proffitt was part of a group of parents that petitioned lawmakers to address the lapsing deal. Two dozen state representatives responded in an open letter by calling for insurers to “find a solution that maintains CHOP’s inclusion in the network.”
Read the open letter below
“It was going to probably take the whole summer, just switching everything over,” said Profitt, who described it as a lengthy process that could have left many low-income families or families that rely on Medicaid for specialized care scrambling. For families like Proffitt’s that need specialized care, even with insurance, treatment costs can reach millions of dollars.
In a joint statement, CHOP and Keystone called the deal a multi-year contract. “We are appreciative for the collaboration between teams from both organizations. Providing patients, members, and families with access to high quality care is a shared priority, and we are proud to continue our efforts to serve our region’s most vulnerable children,” they said.
When asked, however, they declined to specify the length of the contract.
“What I've seen in the past is usually two or three [years],” said Proffitt. “Are we going to have to go through this same process? Or is there something that our legislators can do? Is there a change here that needs to be made?”