Home health agencies, assisted living facilities, and long-term care providers run on a direct-care workforce — aides, CNAs, and support staff — with turnover rates far above most industries and margins that are often tightly constrained by Medicaid or insurance reimbursement rates. A group plan's fixed premium and participation requirements rarely survive contact with that combination.
Contact Us How ICHRA WorksDirect care turnover in home health and long-term care regularly runs well above general workforce averages, which makes group plan participation minimums difficult to sustain — by the time a group plan renews, a meaningful share of the originally-enrolled population may already be gone. At the same time, reimbursement-driven margins leave little room to absorb a group renewal increase, even as competitive benefits become more important for retention in an industry facing a well-documented staffing shortage.
Every plan is designed around the specific business, but here's a representative starting point for healthcare support & long-term care:
| Employee class | Who's typically in it | Example monthly contribution |
|---|---|---|
| Full-time direct care staff | Home health aides, CNAs, direct support professionals at 30+ hrs/week | $300–$425/mo |
| Administrative/salaried | Office staff, care coordinators, management | $450–$600/mo |
| PRN/per-diem staff | As-needed or on-call direct care workers | Typically excluded |
Figures are illustrative starting ranges, not quotes — actual contribution levels depend on budget, local plan costs, and ACA affordability requirements where applicable.
A home health agency employs 40 direct care aides with annual turnover well above the agency's other roles, alongside 6 administrative and care-coordination staff. A group plan quote required a participation percentage the agency struggled to maintain given how often the direct care roster changed. Under ICHRA, the agency set a $350/month contribution for full-time direct care staff and $500/month for administrative staff, with per-diem workers excluded from the class. The fixed structure meant the agency's benefits cost no longer depended on hitting a moving participation target, and the benefit itself became a real recruiting tool in a tight labor market.
No — the opposite, actually. ICHRA's lack of a participation minimum is specifically what makes it workable for a workforce with high turnover, unlike a group plan.
Yes, as long as each group is defined as its own class under permitted criteria (such as salaried vs. hourly) and the contribution is applied consistently within each class.
It can be part of the answer — a real, budgetable health benefit is a meaningful differentiator in an industry where many competitors offer none at all, though it's one factor among several in retention.