OBJECTIVES: To 1) identify the types and characteristics of economic models plans are currently using; 2) identify concerns with these models; and 3) assess thoughts on the future importance of modeling. In 2000 the AMCP introduced its template for dossiers, which includes an economic model.  Little is known about how payers use economic models, their perceived limitations, and how recent health care initiatives, such as comparative effectiveness research (CER), might impact use of economic models by health-plan decision-makers. METHODS: A web-based survey of 60 managed care payers was conducted in September 2009 to assess perceptions and roles of economic models in decision-making. RESULTS: A total of 60 responses (35 pharmacy directors, 17 medical directors, 4 consultants, and 4 others) representing more than 85 million lives, was received. 50% of respondents reported that they only used in-house models, 22% used both in-house and industry models, while 23% did not use economic models. Budget impact models were preferred by 23% of respondents, cost-effectiveness models by 15%; 62% thought both were equally important. Microsoft Excel (65%) was the preferred software platform; AWP (25%) and WAC (27%) were the preferred drug pricing references. The majority believed that models should include the costs of treating AEs (50%) and off-label use (62%). Over half (55%) felt QALYs are not a trustworthy measure and a majority (75%) had little trust in industry sponsored models, largely due to a lack of credible inputs and data sources (37%). Most decision-makers (57%) believe that models will become more important over the next 2 to 3 years, and 72% believe that CER will increase the relevance of models. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that the majority of payers use economic models, believe that economic models will become more important in the near future, and think that CER will make models more relevant.