WHY WAS THIS FUNDED?

The federal government needs to provide accessible customer support for large health programs like Medicare and Medicaid, and it contracts with private companies like Maximus to handle the volume of calls, chats, and inquiries that government agencies cannot manage entirely on their own.

WHAT PUBLIC PROBLEM IS IT TRYING TO SOLVE?

Millions of Americans contact the federal government each year with questions about their health coverage, benefits, and eligibility. Without a well-staffed contact center, people could face long wait times, unanswered questions, and difficulty accessing the health benefits they are entitled to.

WHO BENEFITS?

People who rely on federal health programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and the Health Insurance Marketplace benefit directly, as do the thousands of contact center workers employed by Maximus to handle those interactions.

WHAT ARE THE RISKS?

A contract of this size carries risks of cost overruns, inconsistent service quality, and limited government oversight of a private company handling sensitive personal health information. If performance is poor, the public could receive incorrect or delayed information about their benefits.

WHAT HAPPENS IF FUNDING IS REMOVED?

If this contract were cancelled, the government would need to quickly find another way to handle a large volume of public inquiries about health programs, which could cause serious delays and confusion for people trying to access Medicare, Medicaid, or marketplace coverage.

ARGUMENTS FOR

• •Running contact centers through an experienced private contractor can be faster and more cost-effective than building and staffing a new government operation from scratch.
• •Maximus has an established track record working with federal health programs, which may reduce startup time and service disruptions for the public.
• •Centralizing contact center operations under one contract can create consistent service standards and make it easier for the government to monitor performance.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST

• •A single $2.9 billion contract awarded to one company creates dependence on that vendor and reduces the government's flexibility if service problems arise.
• •Profit motives of a private contractor may not always align with the goal of providing thorough, patient support to vulnerable populations navigating complex health programs.
• •Large federal service contracts have historically been criticized for lack of transparency, making it difficult for taxpayers and oversight bodies to verify that the money is being spent efficiently.