Draft bill would require insurers to ensure accurate behavioral‑health directories and ease single‑case out‑of‑network access

Representative Steve Eliason introduced a draft committee bill, “Health Plan Provider Directory Amendments,” in response to a legislative audit that found about 69% of sampled behavioral‑health providers listed in commercial directories were not available to take new patients. “We have a problem,” Eliason said; the bill seeks to make insurer directories more accurate and easier for members to navigate.

The draft would require insurers to publish and update provider directories, investigate reports of inaccurate listings, verify directory accuracy, conduct an annual audit, and report directory data to the state insurance commissioner. It also establishes a process for single‑case out‑of‑network agreements when no in‑network behavioral‑health provider can see a patient in a timely manner and grants the insurance commissioner rulemaking authority to implement the statute.

Eliason described outreach to accountable care organizations and insurers and said one practical idea was to add a visible filter (green/yellow/red) showing whether a provider is accepting new patients. He said the bill is a draft and the language — including response time expectations for providers — remains open to change.

Michael Sontag of the Utah Health Insurance Association told the committee carriers already have staff who help members find accepting providers and that insurer websites with a quick “accepting new patients” filter are a practical improvement. Sarah Straub, representing the Utah Association for Marriage and Family Therapy and an outpatient practice owner, said some contracts penalize providers who mark themselves as not accepting new patients and noted that insurers often list only fully licensed therapists rather than associates or supervisees who can see patients under supervision.

Representative Ward pressed on practicality, asking whether a one‑business‑day response requirement from provider offices is realistic given front‑desk variability and multiple insurers. Eliason said he is open to adjusting specific timing and clarified he prefers to leave technical details to the insurance commissioner’s rulemaking authority.

Eliason said the draft seeks stakeholder input before filing; he encouraged insurers, providers and patient advocates to submit feedback so the language can be refined before the legislative session.