Maryland

Certificate of Need Analysis

Most Restrictive

95/100

Highly Restrictive

Wes Moore

Democrat

Top 5/19

Most Restrictive States

1968

Year Enacted

100%

Hospital System Affiliation

61.5%

Top Insurer Market Share

90

Day Standard Review

Scope of Regulation

What requires a Certificate of Need in Maryland?

Covered Services & Facilities

  • New or expanded hospitals
  • Ambulatory surgical facilities (2+ ORs)
  • Nursing homes & residential treatment centers
  • Home health and hospice agencies
  • Specialized services (organ transplant, open-heart surgery, NICUs)
  • Capital expenditures over inflation-adjusted thresholds ($10M for hospitals, $5M for others)

Application Process

Review AuthorityMaryland Health Care Commission (MHCC)
Application FeeVaries by project type (per COMAR)
Review Timeline90 days (standard) to 150 days (with hearing)
Right to InterveneYes, for competitors who can show adverse impact

Market Concentration

Who benefits from the lack of competition?

MedStar Health

~$9.0 Billion Revenue (FY25)

Johns Hopkins Health

~$8.7 Billion Revenue (FY23)

UMMS

~$1.85 Billion Revenue (Flagship)

Insurer Market Share (Fully Insured)

61.5%

CareFirst BCBS

21.3%

Kaiser

17.2%

Others

The Human Cost

Documented cases of patient harm or access denial.

No Public Record of Denials

Our investigation found no publicly documented instances of the Maryland Health Care Commission formally denying a Certificate of Need application. While approvals are noted in reports, specific details on denied projects, withdrawn applications under pressure, or legal challenges are not made available. This lack of transparency makes it impossible to quantify the full chilling effect of the law on potential healthcare innovators and the patients they would serve.

Reform Status

Has Maryland made progress in rolling back CON?

Limited Reforms

Maryland has not undertaken a wholesale repeal of its CON program. Reforms have been piecemeal, focusing on adjusting capital thresholds for inflation (2006) and tightening the criteria for competitor interventions (2023). These changes do not fundamentally alter the restrictive nature of the law.

Entrenched System

With 100% of its acute-care hospitals owned by large systems and a commercial insurance market dominated by two carriers, the state\'s healthcare economy is a consolidated fortress. The CON law serves as the primary defense mechanism, protecting incumbents from new competition and preserving the status quo.

05Editorial

The Rojas Report Take

Maryland’s Certificate of Need program is not a regulatory tool; it is a state-sanctioned cartel. With a score of 95 out of 100, it stands as one of the most formidable barriers to competition in the nation. The data is unequivocal: 100% of the state’s hospitals are consolidated into systems, and a single insurer, CareFirst, controls a staggering 61.5% of the fully insured market. This is not a free market; it is a closed loop where established giants are protected from innovation and disruption.

The law’s defenders will point to minor tweaks—adjusting capital thresholds in 2006 or refining intervention rules in 2023—as evidence of progress. This is a smokescreen. Raising the cost of entry and making it slightly harder for a competitor to object does nothing to dismantle the fundamental anti-competitive structure. The complete absence of public records on CON denials is perhaps the most damning fact; the law works not by saying \'no,\' but by ensuring no one even dares to ask.

Maryland’s CON law is the legal architecture of a healthcare monopoly.

The Rojas Report

Explore Related Investigations

The National CON Investigation

See how all 19 CON states compare.

West Virginia

An in-depth look at another highly restrictive state.

The 340B Drug Program

Investigating the controversial drug pricing scheme.

Sources: Maryland statutes and regulations; Maryland Health Care Commission reports; academic and policy analyses; press releases and health system data.