Jun
29

Tilting at windmills

Is an apt metaphor for my ongoing and – so far – futile effort to get industry “thought leaders” to focus on the impact of human-caused climate change on worker health – and workers’ comp.

But, never one to admit a cause is hopeless (see my past battles to stop physician dispensing)…here we go again.

KFF just published an analysis identifying the:

occupations that are at increased risk of climate-related health impacts, examines the characteristics of workers in these jobs, and discusses the implications of these findings

This should be required reading for actuaries, underwrites, and risk managers…especially those in states:

  • with record high temperatures – looking at you, Texas;
  • vulnerable to hurricanes – looking at you, southeastern coastal states;
  • and under air quality alerts due to wildfire smoke – looking at most of the midwest and northeast – and western states too.

so much for my rowing workout this morning…or construction work, or agricultural work, or roadway maintenance, or utility upgrades, or forestry, or sanitation, or first responders…

Key takeaways from KFF’s research…

  • there are over 65 million nonelderly adult workers in occupations at increased risk for climate-related health risks, accounting for over four in ten of nonelderly workers.
  • workers in occupations with increased climate-related health risks are more likely to be uninsured, contributing to challenges accessing health care.

For risk managers, actuaries…and anyone a) committed to worker health and/or b) with dollars at risk, ere’s a handy list of occupations with high exposure to climate-change related health risks…

What does this mean for you?

Reality always wins. 

Ok trolls, have at it…


Jun
21

Quick hits….

Healthcare costs for the average family of four topped $31,000 in 2023.

That’s the latest from Milliman.

Think about that – what percentage of your annual income is $31,000?

a third?

a quarter?

a fifth?

to calculate your total costs, click here.

Climate change’s impact on worker health and workers’ comp is getting more attention every day.

It is now hitting the C-Suite…

This morning, Harvard Business Review called out increasing focus by business execs around wildfires:

we are seeing a rapid rise in employer inquiries related to employee health and the best practices around air quality concerns.

The piece has excellent recommendations.

Word to the wise – whether you are an insurer, TPA, risk manager or captive manager, regardless of your view on human-caused global warming, when the C-Suite comes calling you’d best have a plan. 

Even better, you’d best have implemented it.

good news…

339,000  – that’s May’s increase in employment. That is spot on the average monthly increase for the last 12 months…

over the last year over 4 million jobs have been created. 

That, dear reader, is just terrific.

More than 1.35 million Americans have been kicked off Medicaid to date…and that’s without totals from Texas and several other states yet to report.

This will:

Argh.

 


Jun
16

Solving Texas’ healthcare problems…or not.

Yesterday we dug into the difficult position Texas Mutual is in thanks to Texas’ Legislature and Governor.

Today – as promised, why forcing Texas Mutual into a business it has zero experience in will NOT solve Texas’ healthcare messand may actually make it worse. (note this is NOT TM’s fault…it is stuck in a very difficult situation through no fault of its own)

First, TM is planning to sell stop-loss and Level Funded plans…let’s be clear – Level Funded plans have been sold in Texas for years; there are a lot of brokers offering these plans throughout the state.

In a phrase, Adverse Selection.

I’ve written about this a LOT – mostly back in the 2000s before the Affordable Care Act came into being and effectively ended adverse selection and the insurance death spiral it creates.

Here’s the Cliff Notes version…

  1. Thanks to the ACA, health insurance companies cannot:
    1. charge people or their employers more if employee(s) have pre-existing medical conditions
    2. refuse to pay for care for those pre-existing conditions
    3. refuse to insure the employer if its workers or their family members have pre-existing conditions.
  2. Back in the pre-ACA days, health insurers got really good at “medical underwriting”  aka identifying and refusing to insure or upcharging anyone who might have the temerity to file a claim. Why?? well, capitalism baby!.
  3. What happens when employers with young, healthy workers drop health insurance or don’t buy it, self-insuring instead of joining other employers in a health insurance “pool”?
    1. the “mix” gets worse; without that employers’ premiums helping cover other employers’ costs, health insurance premiums rise for all the employers left in the pool.
    2. over time,
      1. the number of employers in the pool drops,
      2. healthcare costs zoom (as only sick people who really need insurance stay in the pool)
      3. eventually the insurer goes bankrupt as it can’t charge enough.

Let’s suppose Texas Mutual’s program to sell self-insured health benefit plans (NOT HEALTH INSURANCE) to smaller employers is a rousing success, and hundreds/thousands of employers ditch health insurance and sign up. (TM is proposing to sell “level-funded” health benefits plans, a type of self-insurance)

Remember, TM will be medically underwriting employers that apply for health benefits plan. As the incredibly knowledgeable (and friend) Louise Norris writes;

Medical underwriting refers to the process by which a life or health insurer uses an applicant’s medical history to decide whether they can offer them a policy, and whether the policy will include pre-existing condition exclusions and/or a premium that’s higher than the standard rate.

Costs will be lower for TM’s health benefits customers because their employees’/families’ heath risks are lower than the average Texas employer’s.

Good for those healthy employers! – they get health benefits for their workers and their families at a lower price.

But…costs for employers left in the health insurance pool go up. And Up. And Up.

So, those employers apply for a Level-Funded plan…but

…some of their workers/workers’ families have pre-existing conditions, so at best they will pay more, at worst those conditions won’t be covered OR they won’t be offered a plan.

What does this mean for you?

this, dear reader, is why forcing Texas Mutual to offer smaller employers health benefit plans will NOT solve Texas’ health care problems.

For a much more detailed discussion of adverse selection, see here.


Jun
15

Texas Mutual, $?%@&#) Legislators, and Unintended Consequences

Exclusive!!! photo of Texas’ elected representatives’ legislation development process

(earlier reporting on TM’s health benefits thing is here.)

The Net – If employers and their employees aren’t happy with Texas Mutual’s health benefits program, TM’s brand will suffer.

TM will NOT be selling health insurance, rather it will be selling “level funded plans” – a form of self-insurance. TM will be acting as a TPA and stop-loss carrier for health benefits plans.

This is a BIG deal, because unlike health insurance plans, Self-insured plans are regulated by the Feds under ERISA – NOT by the State of Texas.

ERISA is hugely complicated; very few small business brokers understand ERISA.

And you can rest assured NONE of their employer customers will have a clue…that is, until something hits the fan. Oh, and under ERISA, the employer is legally responsible and liable for compliance – NOT TM, the broker, stop-loss carrier, TPA, or any other party.

Here’s just a few of the issues…

  1. Unlike the employer’s single contract for health insurance, ERISA plans have multiple contracts (listed below) — all contracts must be completely consistent on coverage, financial liability, and which benefits are covered at what level.
    • Stop loss – stop loss carriers determine what they’ll pay for; unless the contract explicitly states it will pay for EVERYTHING that’s approved by the employer, the carrier alone determines what it will – and won’t – pay.
      • Oh, and stop-loss contracts do NOT pay for medical management fees, like those incurred in reducing huge hospital bills – the employer does.
    • TPA
    • Employer
    • Possibly others e.g. network, medical management
  2. Brokers will have to explain to employers how TM’s plan is different from “health insurance” – but very few – if any – brokers will know or be able to clearly explain those differences.
    • Example – ERISA plans don’t have to cover Essential Benefits (maternity, mental health, substance abuse treatment, prescription drugs etc.)…In fact ERISA plans can cover – or not cover – anything the plan sponsor (employer) wants.  TM’s health benefits plans will likely be different from health insurance plans…thus comparing TM plans with alternatives will be complicated and hard to explain.
      • Employee’s spouse…“wait, you’re telling me my pregnancy isn’t covered??!!”
  3. TM will medically underwrite employers…that is, review all past claims and medical records to identify employees’ and their families’ health problems, then adjust the rates and/or refuse to cover treatment for those pre-existing conditions. 
    • This directly conflicts with several sub-sections of Sec. 2054-603 of Texas’ Insurance Code which reads:
      TM must “fully explore all health coverage options that may be offered under this subchapter and place emphasis on:

      • ensuring adequacy of benefits and access to care for individuals in this state with preexisting conditions;
      • issuing coverage in a manner that does not discriminate against individuals with preexisting conditions
      • ensuring equitable costs regardless of gender or prospects of pregnancy or childbirth.”
        (note the language says “place emphasis on”, which allows major wiggle room)
        Employee’s spouse…“wait, you’re telling me my diabetes/hypertension/ depression isn’t covered?”

What does this mean for you?

Do NOT blame Texas Mutual for this…blame Texas’ Legislature and Governor. 

Next – why this won’t do a damn thing to solve Texas’ health care mess, but Legislators and the Governor score political points.


Jun
14

It is getting very real

The failure to see change and anticipate its impact is often fatal.

Myopia is now infecting workers’ comp – and the consequences will be dramatic. I’m speaking about human-caused global warming.

Wildfires in California and the west are now commonplace, conveniently far away from those of us in the northeast…Until we woke up last week to this…

Brought on by unprecedented wildfires in Quebec, a thousand miles north of New York’s Finger Lakes, the smoke shut down sporting events; cancelled construction, outdoor maintenance, farming, road repairs, even meter reading.

This should, but likely will not force us to finally grasp how bad things will get. Yet OSHA is woefully behind in promulgating heat standards as is pretty much every state save California, conference attendees ignore sessions on the impact of climate change on workers’ comp, and articles, research, and discussion of the topic is all but non-existent.

For an industry that prides itself on “risk management”, the willful refusal on the part of many to acknowledge that human-caused global warming is:

  • real,
  • happening faster than many predicted, and
  • will increase the number of workers who get hurt and sickened

is nothing less than an abdication of responsibility.

We talk a good game, congratulate ourselves for “injured worker advocacy”, sponsor Kid’s Chance, laud “industry leaders” who ignore the clear and all-too-present dangers, and award trophies for all manner of “accomplishments”, all the while belittling, laughing off, and ignoring the greatest threat to worker health we’ve seen in generations.

What does this mean?

Shame.


Jun
12

Texas Mutual foray into health insurance…part 2

Last week we talked about Texas’ healthcare problems and the Texas legislature’s decision to force Texas Mutual to jump into the health insurance business.

Like you, I wondered mostly “why”…

  • why force a very successful workers’ comp insurer to get into a business it knew nothing about
  • why not look to other health insurers, or
  • why not just expand Medicaid (like most states have)

So, I reached out to all the original sponsors of the legislation with several questions about the whys…even with four days to respond, none bothered to address my queries (one  – an office worker for James Frank (R) – responded to my email, saying he wasn’t “available to respond”).

To be clear, Texas’ healthcare problems include: 

  • bad-and-getting-worse access to care…especially in rural areas;
  • a quarter of working-age people don’t have health insurance; and
  • healthcare affordability is among the worst in the nation.

Fortunately, the CEO of TM’s new venture was very responsive to my request for an interview.  Meredith Duncan is a highly experienced, very knowledgeable and quite forthcoming executive with decades of experience in health plan operations.

Here’s our interview.

  1. MCM – Why is TXM getting into health insurance?
    The legislature created TM to help stabilize WC 30 decades ago. The passage of Texas House Bill 3752 in 2021 allowed Texas Mutual to create a subsidiary to provide health benefits coverage.  Through the creation of the subsidiary, we aim to create  additional health coverage options  for small business in TX.    Texas Mutual is a mission-driven organization, and I am excited to bring that same orientation to support small businesses in Texas.
  2. What made you decide to accept this position?
    [For a] couple reasons – I’m a native Texan, and my family is as well, I got into healthcare because [some] family [members] had health issues.  I chose this role becauseI am passionate about reducing the number of uninsured in Texas… [I’m] looking to solve that so business can get coverage for employees and families…I enjoy work that requires me to build and design, so this role seemed like a great fit.
  3. When do you expect to launch?
    Looking to quote new business in the first quarter of 2024 and issue policies in Q2, depending on regulatory approval.Our immediate plans are applying to the state to be a licensed stop loss carrier. Assuming we receive TDI approval, we’ll launch stop loss and self-funded plans in the first half of 2024 – using level funding mechanisms, medically underwritten…a level funded product looks like insurance but financials are trued up at end of the year… Over time, we will evaluate opportunities to enter other lines of business
  4. There are several key components of any health insurance program – claims, underwriting, medical management, provider networks, compliance, policyholder service – will you be looking to handle these internally or outsource specific functions?
    For most part outsource to start – more efficient to outsource for TPA services, PBM, and technology to interface with agents, customers, providers, members…also outsourcing actuarial services for short term, underwriting we are evaluating…[it] may be either inhouse or outsourced”
  5. Are there synergies [with Texas Mutual] that will be beneficial?
    Immediately [we] will keep our businesses very separate, evaluate opportunities down the road where we could support businesses together in markets outside major metro areas that are underserved.
  6. You’ve been on the job for several months, what’s been the biggest surprise?
    I am impressed with the TM leadership team and having a new set of colleagues to collaborate with has been a great surprise. Second, market feedback has been very positive, in general brokers are pretty tough on payers but they have been supportive and excited about what we are designing; there’s incredible loyalty to TM on broker side.
  7. What will TM will learn from group health…
    What they may find over time is keeping employees healthy and insured and making sure they have ability to get primary care, manage diabetes and MSK health will help outcomes on comp side as well…

What does this mean for you?

Spoiler alert – beware of seemingly well-intentioned legislators…


Jun
7

Work comp provider networks and access to care

Of late there’s been “confusion” in several quarters about the impact of provider networks/PPOs/specialty networks on access to care and outcomes.

These uninformed or willfully ignorant folks claim all manner of bad stuff is due to workers’ comp provider networks – without an iota of evidence to support those assertions.

Let’s pick on the Golden State…

Let’s be clear…actual research shows:

there is NO significant difference in access to care for patients treated within or outside a Medical Provider Network.

This from CWCI’s report

Similarly, there was no significant difference in distance from the patient to provider between MPN and non-MPN patients.

Quoting CWCI…

The latest proximity to care findings also track with results of CWCI’s April 2021 research which found that 99 percent of claims in which treatment was rendered by an MPN provider, and 98 percent of non-MPN claims met the state’s access standards.

What does this mean for you?

Do NOT give any credence to statements similar to: “of course, paying providers less than fee schedule affects access to care” UNLESS they are backed up by real research and not built on a pile of unfounded and unsupported assumptions.


Jun
6

the basics of price and spend in work comp medical…

Basics here folks…

Facility costs soak up 2 out of every 5 dollars of work comp medical spend.

“Physician” costs take up another 2 bucks…however that is misleading.

In NCCI-speak, “physician” is a catch-all for most practitioners…MDs, DOs, PTs, chiropractors, PAs…and, the “physician” fee schedule in most states doesn’t apply to things like physical medicine (PM).

Historically PM accounts for right around one of every 6 work comp medical dollars (yes that is a very solid number based on a ton of work I’ve done), although like everything in work comp it varies somewhat by state.

Then there’s drugs, dx imaging, DME, etc.

Drugs account for less than 10% of spend, a figure that has been declining for years thanks to much better clinical management of pharmacy  – mostly by PBMs – more generic usage, a massive decrease in overuse of opioids, fewer new brand drugs used for MSK injuries, and declining fee schedules.

Risk and Insurance’s Annemarie Mannion penned an excellent explanation of how Medicare reimbursement affects work comp fee schedules.  Read her piece and save it in your reference files…you will need it in the future.

Finally, network penetration does have some effect on prices paid…although that impact has declined over the last few years as providers have figured out that when it comes to negotiating with health systems, workers’ comp is pretty much clueless.  Here’s a synopsis of network impact from a post a couple years back.

 


Jun
1

that giant sucking sound…v3

is hospitals hoovering dollars out of employers, work comp insurers, and taxpayers’ wallets.

(sorry all…due to a bug in WordPress some of you may be getting this again)

WCRI’s latest research report on hospital costs is a must-read for anyone involved in work comp claims, medical management and actuarial issues. Kudos to Drs Olesya Fomenko and Rebecca Yang for their excellent work. 

The study focuses mostly on how payments for outpatient surgery vary across the different types of fee schedules (no fee schedule vs fixed amount vs cost to charge ratio vs percent of charges…)…and how those payments have changed over time.

But there are several other issues that I’d argue are more impactful.

  • It’s not so much the type of fee schedule as other factors…
    • there’s a LOT of variation between states with the same type of FS
    • failing to expand Medicaid is a big problem for hospitals
  • Basing fee schedules on percent of charges is a really bad idea…
    • states with %-of-charges FS had – by FAR – the highest costs, averaging more than 3 times what Medicare pays. (Medicare reimbursement is slightly above break-even for hospitals)
    • `hospitals easily game the “fee schedule” by jacking up list prices
    • 2 of the three states with the largest increases in hospital payments had FS based on %-of-charges
  •  States with NO fee schedules were not quite as bad – averaging “only” 225% of Medicare
  • Clearly network arrangements have failed miserably. 

What does this mean for you?

Actuaries…check the inflation trend to predict where costs will be in the future

Medical management folks…dig into your data to identify the worst offenders, and direct care AWAY from them.  Hint – HCA facilities are usually among the worse offenders.

Bill reviewers – STOP relying on network discounts and start getting  LOT smarter about dealing with facilities.


May
23

Work comp drugs – Three things

Workers’ comp news…

After a long and litigious delay, myMatrixx has been awarded the contract to manage pharmacy benefits for the Coal and Energy programs run by the Federal Department of Labor’s Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Details of the case – which involved a protest by rival PBM Optum – are here.

That’s the good news (the Feds should have had a PBM managing these programs years ago).

Now, the bad news.

The press continues to dive into the audit of the other OWCP program – the one that provides workers’ comp to all Federal employees (FECA). [audit report is free for download here]

The latest is from Leslie Small of AIS Health. [available at no cost via free trial subscription].

From Ms. Small’s piece:

  • “OWCP has been doing a poor job of both controlling the FECA programs spending on prescription drugs and implementing its own policies to ensure that prescriptions are being appropriately dispensed, said the OIG report.”
  • OWCP published a bulletin in 2011 that forbid reimbursement for fast-acting fentanyl prescriptions unless claimants had been diagnosed with a certain type of cancer…during the audit period…98.7% of the fast-acting fentanyl scripts that OWCP [and taxpayers] paid for “went to claimants without evidence of one of hte eligible cancer diagnoses” 
  • Even more troubling – if that’s possible – OWCP did not institute controls to mitigate opioid usage until the end of 2016, years after many commercial insurers, third-rate administrators, and large employees had done so…”

Here’s hoping this much-needed attention results in even-more-needed improvements.(my opinion only)

Drug costs in California are getting well deserved attention again; CWCI’s research identified 9 drugs – 3 each opioids, dermatologicals and antidepressants – that account for a significant percentage of total drug spend. CWCI members can get the full report at no cost; it’s $18 for others.

Briefly, branded anti-depressants, tapentadol/Nucynta, and the three anti-depressants make up a small percentage of scripts but a big percentage of dollars.

Of course, in the vast majority of cases the dermos are just BS drugs that should never be allowed…

What does this mean for you?

Don’t sleep on pharmacy...sure costs are down, but it still has a major influence on recovery, RTW, and claim closure.