Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A BETTER CE
MANAGED CARE
Lecture
MANAGED CARE......................................................................................................................... 1
Section 1.......................................................................................................................................... 5
I. THE NATURE OF MANAGED CARE ................................................................................. 5
A. THE IMPORTANCE OF HEALTH INSURANCE .......................................................... 5
B. BASIC BUILDING BLOCKS OF HEALTH COVERAGE ......................................... 6
C. COMPREHENSIVE MAJOR MEDICAL POLICIES. ................................................. 6
D. ABOUT MANAGED CARE ......................................................................................... 7
E. Managed Care Is the System We Have Today ............................................................... 8
F. PURPOSE OF MANAGED CARE................................................................................ 8
G. THE OLD METHOD OF COVERING HEALTH COST............................................. 9
II. A NEW APPROACH......................................................................................................... 9
A. THE NEW METHOD OF COVERING HEALTH COST ............................................ 9
B. COST VS. CHOICE ..................................................................................................... 10
III. HOW THE SYSTEM OPERATES ................................................................................ 10
A. PROCEDURES IN MANAGED CARE...................................................................... 11
B. COORDINATION IN MANAGING THE CASE. ...................................................... 11
C. AHEAD OF THE CURVE........................................................................................... 11
D. BENEFITS OF MANAGING INFORMATION ......................................................... 12
E. MAKING THE DOCTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR HEALTHCARE DECISIONS ...... 12
F. GATEKEEPER, THE PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIAN.............................................. 12
G. CLAIM FORMS BY PROVIDER RATHER THAN BY PATIENT.......................... 13
H. PREVENTING AN ILLNESS IS A FAR BIGGER VICTORY THAT CURING ONE.
........................................................................................................................................... 13
IV. HEALTH MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS ......................................................... 14
A. NEW CAPITAL FORMATIONS IN HEALTH CARE .............................................. 14
B. NATURE OF CONTRACTS WITH PROVIDERS: CONTROL VS. COST ............. 14
C. CONSUMER SATISFACTION BASED ON TYPE OF PLAN ................................. 17
V. COST CONTROL BY MANAGED CARE .................................................................... 18
A. THE SHIFT TO OUTPATIENT CARE ...................................................................... 18
B. CONTROLLING THE COST OF PHARMACEUTICALS........................................ 18
C. COST CONTROL FOR MENTAL CONDITION TREATMENT. ............................ 20
D. THE HISTORY OF “USUAL CUSTOMARY AND REASONABLE”..................... 20
E. INCENTIVES TO THE PROVIDER/CONTROL BY PREMIUM PAYER .............. 21
F. THE PREADMISSION REVIEW CONTROL............................................................ 21
G. CONTROLLING LENGTH OF HOSPITAL STAY................................................... 22
H. SECOND SURGICAL OPINION................................................................................ 22
I. LARGE CASE MANAGEMENT ................................................................................. 23
Why is it so important for the agent to see to it that his clients have health insurance?
We have the best healthcare system in the world if you happen to be included, but what about the
people who are not included? Let’s consider a person with an injured hand. At the time that he
was injured he had no health insurance. He could not afford to have the hand properly repaired.
As a result he could not get a good paying job with health benefits. The lack of health insurance
when he needed it doomed him to lower paying jobs forever. Those lower paying jobs do not
provide Health Insurance. Therefore, he just keeps getting poorer and sicker.
The leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States is unpaid medical bills. Half of
the uninsured owe unpaid bills to hospitals, and a third are being pursued by collection agencies.
Children without health insurance are less likely to receive medical attention for serious injuries,
or infections that don’t go away, or for asthma.
Lung cancer patients without insurance are less likely to receive surgery, chemotherapy, or
radiation treatment. Heart attack victims without health insurance are less likely to receive
angioplasty. People with pneumonia who don’t have health insurance are less likely to receive
x-rays or consultations.
The death rate in any given year for someone without health insurance is 25% higher than for
someone with insurance. Because the uninsured are sicker than the rest of us, they can’t get
better jobs, and because they can’t get better jobs they can’t afford health insurance, and because
they can’t afford health insurance they get even sicker.
Lack of health care when they need it can result in permanently lower earnings.
Consider a rugged outdoorsman. One day his back was injured and he had no insurance. He
said, “There are times when I should’ve gone to the doctor, but I couldn’t afford to go because I
don’t have insurance, like when my back acts up I should’ve gone. If I had insurance I would’ve
gone, because I know I can get treatment, but when you can’t afford it you don’t go. Because the
harder the hole you get into in terms of bills, then you’ll never get out. So I just say, “I can deal
with the pain”. That sums it up.
All providers (hospitals, doctors, pharmaceutical companies) are required to play the Managed
Does anyone pay this very high fee? Yes! The poor person who needs treatment and has no
health plan!
Even people with a good income need a health plan to get the benefit of the discounted fees that
doctors hospitals and pharmacists charge the Managed Care Organizations. When an employer
buys health coverage, he is buying the deal, which is the lower price the Managed Care
Organization gets.
Without those lower prices, health care is unaffordable. This arrangement forces us all to buy the
health plan coverage. We can not leave anyone without coverage.
There is a reason we start to discuss health insurance coverage in terms of building blocks. An
agent who sells this kind of policy must always remember that selling this policy is for agents
who want to understand the changes. This is an ever changing field. Coverages change,
premiums change, the networks of physicians and hospitals change. The formularies, which are
lists of pharmaceuticals a health care plan provides, are constantly changing.
Even the approach is changing. Healthcare started out entirely physician directed. The doctor
made all the decisions and carried them out the way he wanted to. With the rise of Managed
Care, people who worked for the managed care companies made decisions about what care
would be given. The latest change of approach is to allow the insured person to decide. He is
given a sum of tax-free money to use for medical care. He may decide to have the care or skip
the care. Always look for the changes.
The building blocks do not change. There are deductibles and copayments. There are limits.
There are services that will be provided and services that won’t be provided. There is always an
organization such as an insurance company or a managed-care organization to collect the
premium and make the decisions about what to pay. There are networks of providers. There is
regulation at the federal and state level. These building blocks are always with us. But they are
constantly being rearranged.
Comprehensive Major Medical policies are a system of sharing the cost of medical care between
the insurer and the insured. The first $500 per person per year is not paid by the insurance
companies: it is referred to as a deductible.
The next $5,000 of medical costs per person is shared: the insured pays a 20% co-payment, and
the insurer pays the remaining 80%. For most insured, the medical insurance year ends before he
has $5,000 in medical costs. In the following year he starts all over again with the $500
deductible that he pays himself.
However, suppose that during a policy year his medical costs are more than the $500 deductible
and the shared $5,000 put together.
The shared $5,000 means that the insured has paid a 20% co-payment or $1000 out of his own
pocket, and the insurance company has paid the other $4000. So the insured has paid $1000 in
co-payments and $500 in deductibles. He is out of pocket a total of $1500. When that happens he
has reached the “stop loss”. It puts a $1500 ceiling on his payments. The insurance company
pays everything above that amount, until the year ends and the cycle starts all over again.
However, if he has an ongoing condition, he will not be subject to a repeated deductible for that
condition.
These were offered by insurance companies as insurance policies. The problem was that
comprehensive medical policies treated a doctor visit or hospital stay or need for
pharmaceuticals as a loss. Those medical expenses were treated the same way as a house fire or
an automobile accident. The extent of the patient’s loss was the amount charged by the hospital,
doctor or pharmacist. In the insurance industry hospitals doctors and pharmacists are referred to
as “providers”. The provider could charge absolutely whatever he wanted to. All that the
insurance company could do was raise premium.
The contract limited what the provider would be paid. When managed care first appeared it
resulted in a reduction of premium because managed-care organizations paid out less than
insurance companies pay for the same service.
We should first consider the size of the health-care industry. It accounts for almost 15 percent of
the gross domestic product, which is the sum total of all the goods and services produced in the
country. It accounts for nearly 10 percent of all jobs. Therefore any change in the healthcare
industry will have a very widespread effect, as well as personally affecting each and every one of
us.
It is in industry with its own language. It is a rapidly changing industry. It has no place for those
who want to learn what is, and not learn the changes.
An agent who wants to stand out will stay on top of all the changes in health care plans, as well
as changes he expects to happen!
Most people find out about healthcare in the media: TV, newspapers, and magazines. The media
does not always accurately describe the healthcare coverage or the changes. For example in the
early 1990s when traditional indemnity policies were giving way to managed care, the
newspapers attempted a comparison between the two. They spoke of one vs. the other.
Indemnity is a payment system under which the insurance company pays whatever amount the
doctor charges. Managed care is a system for delivering care under a contract between the doctor
and the Managed-Care Organization. Under managed care the doctor will only be paid the
amount specified in his contract. The press was comparing apples and oranges. An agent must
understand the terminology, or how is the public going to understand one versus the other?
Again, the primary difference between an HMO and traditional indemnity is that the HMO
arranges physicians in every specialty in a list from which a patient may choose.
The old indemnity plans allowed the patient to find his own way around. That is still the greatest
difference between the two.
This means that the treatment must be appropriate for the patient’s medical condition. The care
must be delivered early enough to solve the medical problem. The venue, where service is
provided, must be correct. Should the care be delivered on an inpatient basis, outpatient basis, or
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 8
A Better CE
in a doctor’s office? The right provider of care must already be contracted to provide the service
at the right price. That would be perfection. If it had already happened, every insurance program
would work the same way. Because we have not yet arrived at perfect medical care, each plan
makes its own attempt to balance cost and quality. If there was a perfect way to design a plan,
every plan would use it. As of now, every plan must do the best job it can of balancing costs and
benefits.
Managed care has provided a wonderful opportunity to truly manage the care to provide a better
quality of care at a better price. While the plans have reduced doctor and hospital income, there
is another way to improve the treatment and the cost. This is in the management of the care and
the establishment of better procedures. Much of this is already happening.
If he enters the hospital needing x-ray, he will not be x-rayed numerous times. Today’s x-ray
technician knows exactly how to take an x-ray for each the department in the hospital. All of the
x-rays are taken at one time. He is then sent to surgery, and home with a minimum of delay.
During this course we will see many improvements in treatment that are a result of managed
care. By reducing the amount of money allowed for care, the plans have forced the physicians
and hospitals to find better, faster, and more efficient ways to deliver the care. Managed care is
coordinated care. This is a great opportunity to outperform individual and separate medical
decisions made by a series of doctors chosen by a patient who does not know which doctor to
call on.
Under managed care, each physician is credentialed by the plan. The patient is given a list of
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 9
A Better CE
qualified doctors by specialty. He could even call upon the plan for advice. The plan places
limits on which specialist he can go to.
In order to reduce costs, the plans had to eliminate some things. The first thing that the plans
eliminated was choice. The original HMO was a staff model. Under this model, the patient
entered the HMO building and was assigned to his specific doctor. The plan called him a
primary care physician.
He became known as the gatekeeper, because the patient could not see a specialist without the
primary care physician’s approval.
A little bit of cost was added with the introduction of the Independent Practice Association, or
IPA. Here the patient could consult an independent practice that was on the list, that is, in the
network of providers that the HMO would pay. A little more choice, a little more cost.
Then the open HMOs were introduced, under which the doctor could see patients under an HMO
contract, and the doctor could also see other patients. A little more choice, a little more cost.
HMOs added a POS, or Point of Service plan. The patient could stay in network and only pay a
small co-payment, or go out of network and have some coverage, but pay a deductible and a co-
payment. A little more choice, a little more cost.
Insurance companies that offered traditional indemnity plans tried to reduce premium by offering
a managed indemnity plan. A little more choice, a little more cost.
The highest cost was always the traditional indemnity plan under which the patient had complete
freedom of choice. The greatest choice, the greatest cost.
As you can see, there was a cost involved in giving the patient a choice.
The irony is that managed care reduced costs in the beginning, but is now faced with high and
ever rising costs.
Managed care organizations print booklets containing networks of hospitals and doctors that they
pay, as well as the formulary of drugs that they pay for. Suppose that the producer is working
with a small business owner who wants to provide managed care coverage for himself and his
employees at the lowest cost, but also wants certain doctors and certain medicines for himself,
his key people, and their families. The agent starts with the lowest cost plan to see if it covers the
physicians and medicines that this group wants. If those providers and medicines are not offered
by the lowest priced plan, the agent goes to the next lowest priced plan. The agent then provides
the lowest priced plan that covers the providers and medicines that the business owner wants.
This leads to very important things for a client to think about: cost and the coordination of care
between doctors.
Testing all patients for pre-cancerous conditions, and avoiding the illness is being done more and
more under managed care. The health plans are doing this for profit motivated reasons. They
hope that by spending money on pre- illness testing, they will avoid paying for a lot of expensive
treatment later on. The patient benefits by avoiding the illness or being assured that he does not
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 11
A Better CE
have the illness. Under the old indemnity system, doctors did not routinely ask all of their
patients to get all of the tests. Once the illness manifested itself, the doctors collected large fees
for treating it.
While preventive care is seen as money motivated, it does have the approval of most employees.
After all, they would rather not go through expensive surgical procedures. People do almost
anything to stay healthy. We attend exercise classes, watch our diet, and exercise as we have
never done before. All that the health plans have to do is tap into our desire to be healthy.
The doctor has also taken another calculated risk. He has gambled that by discounting his fees to
the plan, he will take in more patients.
He has his highest risk in a capitation plan. Here he is paid per patient per month. He is paid the
same amount whether the patient is ill or well, regardless of how many visits are required to cure
a condition. Ten years ago a capitation plan was considered to be a cheap plan. Agents would
offer a capitation plan and the employer would refuse it. Today most plans are capitation plans.
The doctor is paid a given amount per patient per month, or PMPM as it is known. He is paid
this amount whether the patient comes in to the office or not. This is another indication of how
employers and employees have come to accept the way the plans work. Ten years ago they
rejected it, today they accept it..
Installing the gatekeeper, and referring to him as the Primary Care Physician, is the very first
thing that HMOs ever did. This has curbed the tendency to over consult a specialist. Under
managed care, the patient can only see a specialist, and have the plan pay for it, by referral from
the Primary Care Physician. It has been said that primary care physicians control up to 80
percent of the dollars spent in the managed care plan. Of course this would include their own
fees, the fees to specialists, pharmaceuticals, and hospital visits.
Patients are pleased not to have to fill out claim forms under Managed Care. Under the old
system patients had to fill out claim forms.
Most cardiac doctors would put a patient who suffered a heart attack on a type of pharmaceutical
called beta blockers. In 1996, 62 percent of such patients covered by HMOs were on beta
blockers. In 1999, that percentage increased to 85 percent. Screening for high cholesterol is an
excellent way to prevent heart disease in the first place. In one year the number of screenings
increased from 59 percent to 69 percent.
In some areas, care ranges. The producer who wants to provide his clients with the best
coverage wants to see what percent of covered people receive certain care. Mammograms for
women in the last year only increased one percent to 73.4 percent. This should be compared to
the National Committee on Quality Assurance’s benchmark of 90 percent. No plan seems to
have reached 90 percent. We will study the National Committee on Quality Assurance later.
Screenings for cervical cancer range from 83 percent of patients in one plan to 60 percent in
another plan. Diabetic patients should receive an eye exam at least annually. Some HMOs
provide this for 28 percent of their patients, others provide this care for 66 percent of their
patients. That is a wide difference. There is also a great difference in the quality of the eye
exam that different plans pay for.
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 13
A Better CE
Follow-up after treatment for mental illness improved from 67 percent to 70 percent in one year.
When a treatment is provided in 70 percent of such cases it appears to plateau.
The agent should find out what quality of care is offered by the plans he is providing. He should
also understand which medical services his plans offer, and which medical services it does not
offer.
The HMO is a brand new capital formation. This means that money has been invested or
borrowed to fund a new organization. This capital is necessary so that it can operate. The
problem with raising money from investors is that investors are waiting for dividends. It is
generally believed that paying those dividends has been at the cost of providing good service.
What happens when the HMO creates an incentive for doctors to keep costs down?
One couple, covered by an HMO had this experience. The doctor assigned by the HMO refused
to allow the woman to call an ambulance when her husband had a seizure. He refused twice.
She finally called the ambulance at her own expense, but her husband was dead when the
ambulance arrived.
The HMO responded that it did not practice medicine at the expense of the patient. The HMO
could have said anything. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 treats an
HMO as an employee benefit, and as such, the HMO is still protected from lawsuits. Can a
former nurse, working for an HMO, make better medical decisions than a doctor? Can a general
practitioner really decide if someone needs to see a specialist? The human body is so complex,
and its condition can change so quickly, that it is hard to argue who is right or wrong.
This is still closed panel because a doctor who is not contracted to the HMO is not compensated
by it. Control over the physician is less than with the staff model. He works for the practice, the
practice contracts with the HMO.
The doctor has his own practice. The list of physicians to choose from is even more extensive.
The primary care physician is still used, and still controls referral to a specialist. Control by the
HMO is even further reduced by the number of different offices.
Because the list of physicians is more extensive, this type of practice has served an excellent
purpose in introducing patients to Managed Care. That is because they are more likely to find
the physician of their choice in the network. Because the number of provider locations is larger,
the HMO has even less control.
The independent practice association is referred to as open panel. That is because he can see
HMO patients or anyone else who wants to use his service. A physician who has the
qualifications will be credentialed and allowed to join. The physician is paid a rate that is
negotiated between the independent practice association the HMO. The HMO pays the IPA, the
IPA pays the physician.
With all of these models, as control decreases, cost increases, and premium increases. Even
though managed care has taken over health care financing, we still have the issue of cost vs.
An all important provision of all managed care contracts is that the physician or hospital can only
charge the amount stated in the contract. The physician or hospital not only agrees to accept what
the plan pays, the physician or hospital also agrees that the patient is only required to pay the
deductibles and co-payments stated in the contract.
The physician or hospital can ask the patient for no more than the deductibles and co-payment
spelled out in the contract!
Also, the doctor is not paid per visit but rather per patient or per condition. The doctor may not
utilize the HMO and charge for endless and unnecessary office visits. The HMO credentials the
providers. If the physician is not up to the standard, he may not remain a member of the
network. Use of the primary care physician provides organization and consistency of a patient’s
treatment and consistency from one patient to the next. Managed care organizations engage in
customer satisfaction surveys, and are also doing a much better job than traditional insurance
companies in evaluating data about effectiveness of treatment. The HMO can measure the
Of course every state has its own requirements. Before offering its services the HMO must
provide the Insurance Commissioner with copies of corporate charters as well as bylaws.
Background information on the founder’s directors and executive officers must be submitted to
the insurance Commissioner. The Commissioner also wants the valuation of the legal reserves
of the HMO. The Commissioner also wants to see copies of the contracts between the HMO and
the doctors and hospitals. The agent should be certain that the HMO has the proper financial
support behind it. The information that you need to determine the financial solvency of an HMO
is a matter of public record. Just go online and check out A.M. Best, Moody’s or Standard and
Poor’s ratings. Weiss ratings also have a lot to tell. Make sure the plan you sell has the financial
wherewithal to pay claims readily.
HMOs can apply for the added distinction of being federally qualified. While it is not necessary
that they gain that distinction, it is very helpful to the agent in selling that company to an
employer. It is also an assurance of good service. To be federally qualified the HMO has to
offer a minimum package of benefits, have a provider network that is adequate to do the job and
accessible to the insured. It must have an appeals procedure to handle member grievances, and
must institute quality assurance programs.
They must also set premiums by community rating to be federally qualified. Most plans
underwrite the employer, rather than use community rating, because they can be more
competitive. This keeps them from being federally qualified.
Managed care simply would not pay for these unnecessary hospital stays. The result has been
the rapid discharge of a patient even after life saving procedures.
A more visible result is the shift to outpatient testing. This can be seen in the construction that
takes place at a hospital. Prior to managed-care, no more than 10 percent of the hospital was
dedicated to outpatient care. Today it is not unusual for 60 percent of the hospital to be designed
around outpatient care. The plans have demanded quicker and more efficient care. Because the
plans control the money, they got it. Patients are pleased not to have to stay in a hospital.
Medical science and technology are always finding ways to treat a patient better and faster. The
best result of managed care is that these gains are converted to economy. Prior to managed care
these gains would only have enriched the physicians. Nowadays, developers of medical
equipment are developing technology that reduces cost, because that is what managed care
demands.
Managed care has improved health care by not paying for unnecessary and annoying procedures
and practices.
Drug prices can be volatile. The HMO contracts with a pharmaceutical manufacturer. These
negotiations would be far more difficult than negotiating with a doctor. There are fewer and
fewer pharmaceutical manufacturers and they keep getting larger due to mergers. There have
been years when HMOs have seen their profits eliminated by increases in the cost of
pharmaceuticals. One pharmaceutical manufacturer may be the only source of a popular drug.
Pharmaceutical manufacturers spend more money advertising than they spend on research. They
know that the patient will ask the doctor to prescribe a given pharmaceutical.
There was a time when pharmaceutical firms would reduce prices hoping that the HMO would
bring them higher volume. That time is past. Pharmaceutical firms know that HMOs have
saturated their market and will not be able to continue delivering increased volume.
HMOs created these lists to control costs of pharmaceuticals. Of course generics are used
extensively. HMOs are also in a position to use their own statistics to determine the
effectiveness of these drugs. Quality care can be delivered with controlled cost based on
experience.
However, it is not possible to isolate the cost of drugs and treat them separately from other costs.
Experience has shown that the use of less expensive drugs can actually increase the cost of
treatment. If the drug does not provide an immediate cure, the patient takes more medicine and
may have to return to the doctor or hospital. With experience, HMOs have learned to provide
the pharmaceutical at the lowest overall cost. Again, only an organization that controls drugs,
doctor visits, and hospitalization can coordinate all three to provide the most cost effective cure.
How does the HMO determine whether or not to pay for certain drugs? Let’s look of the
questions that they have to ask. Let’s consider a man in his fifties who exercises and takes
vitamins daily and avoids smoking. He finds his cholesterol at so high a level that he is at risk
for heart disease. He hears about a powerful drug that reduces cholesterol and asks his doctor to
prescribe it. The drug would cost $800 per year, but had been shown to be most effective in
preventing heart disease.
Should the health plan spend so much money because there is a chance of greater savings later
on? There might be two or more years of paying for this drug before there is any return. By that
time the patient might switch to another health plan, and there would be no return. In the short
run, the plan must maintain a legally required level of reserves. Can a plan sacrifice in exchange
for future gain? This is a question the health plan must answer almost every day. Of course if
One insured who was denied the use of a heart disease preventing drug went to a cardiologist
who the plan did not cover, and who prescribed a drug the plan did not cover. What he obtained
was peace of mind. When we recommend a plan we should ask if that isn’t what everybody
wants. Should someone who wants to take an extraordinary precaution pay for it himself?
We do not yet have the answer to that question.
It appears that employees will be satisfied with a plan as long as the cost is reasonable. If the
cost to them, usually just a co-payment, is low, they remain satisfied unless they have a problem.
Employees just don’t see what the plan is doing unless they have a problem.
It is doubtful that HMOs will reduce their prices much further. They have already achieved most
of the gains possible by reducing provider fees. It seems at this point that doctors and hospitals
have reduced a fee all that is possible. One problem is that hospitals merge and doctors form
larger and larger practice groups to have better bargaining power in setting fees. Some HMOs
are making themselves more attractive by providing the Point of Service option paying for care
outside the network. Of course this would increase the premium. HMOs, like any insurer, are
always trying to process information more efficiently. Processing information more efficiently is
one of the few places were managed-care organizations can look to save money in the future. As
improvements in computers or programming allow, they will do that.
Between 1967 when Medicare was introduced and 1969, medical incomes tripled.
Over time, HMOs and PPO’s have been working very hard to reduce medical compensation.
Starting in the mid-1990s, doctors saw their incomes severely reduced as most of their patients
were covered by a health care plan, and the plan reduced payments every year.
How many visits will be paid for each ailment. Large employers can actively control the amount
of service paid for, rather than just pay for it. A large employer can design a plan to pay for so
many doctor visits, and no more. Utilization management covers the full range of services: large
case management, second surgical opinion, discharge planning, emergency admission, all
treatment, preadmission review, etc.
A clinical evaluator then determines if the hospitalization is appropriate, whether the visit will be
on an inpatient or on an outpatient basis, and will predetermine the length of stay. If it is not
clear that hospitalization is required, utilization review personnel may suggest outpatient
treatment.
That could include preadmission testing. This is done strictly on an outpatient basis. Prior to
health plans becoming established, the patient would be admitted to the hospital for several days.
He would line in a bed while tests were being performed in the laboratory. How ridiculous and
unnecessary it seems today to have a patient lie on a hospital bed while tests are being performed
in a laboratory. This is a very clear demonstration of the changes brought about by the plans.
Today the patient enters the outpatient facility, or goes to another facility, where blood is drawn.
He goes about his business, and the plan saves money.
She negotiates with her opposite number, who is the discharge planning nurse employed by the
hospital. The discharge planning nurse determines on behalf of a hospital when the patient
should be discharged. They discuss the patient’ s condition. The concurrent review coordinator
makes the final decision about payment. However, if it is not possible discharge the patient, there
is a continued stay review. In extraordinary circumstances the plan will pay for some extra time.
The discharge planning nurse also determines where the patient is to go after the hospital. It will
be to a less expensive facility. It might be a nursing home or a rehabilitation center, or the
patient’s own home. Provisions might be made for nurses to visit the patient at home.
Sometimes the need for surgery is so obvious or urgent that time cannot be wasted in seeking a
second opinion. In this case the plan will waive the second surgical opinion requirement. This
also saves the plan the cost of a second opinion where the operation would be performed
anyway.
Of course the PPO staff will be happy to guide the patient to a physician who can offer a second
opinion. Sometimes a third opinion is needed as a tie breaker.
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 22
A Better CE
It is all a matter of costs, and only costs. The two major costs to the insurer are payment of the
provider’s bills and administration. When insurance companies discovered that the cost of
administration of a second surgical opinion was greater than the cost of unnecessary surgery, the
need for a second surgical opinion was dropped by many carriers.
This patient support is not intended as a cost control, but rather as an added service to induce
employers to purchase the plan.
One-third of all emergency room visits are not necessary. If the patient could have reached a
medical professional and discussed the situation, the visit could have been avoided. For
example, a man saw a bat on his screen door. As a reflex action, he hit it. He did not break his
skin, and bats were not rabid in that area. Then he began to worry. He tied up an emergency
room physician assistant for 30 minutes discussing absolutely nothing. Other visits could be
avoided if the patient sought advice earlier on, and went to a regular physician’s office sooner.
Nevertheless, calling the patient support hotline could control cost if patients use it properly.
L. WORKERS COMPENSATION.
Medical benefits in Workers Compensation are based entirely on the employer's liability. When
an employee is injured, the employer is liable for every cent of medical benefits. They are paid
without limit as to time or dollar amount. No deductible, no co-payment. Managed care is used,
but all care must be available and paid for by Workers Compensation. They include everything
from transportation to the emergency room to services of the doctor or surgeon, every bill a
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 23
A Better CE
hospital renders, nursing services, medication, equipment, or prostatic devices. Connecticut
leaves the choice of provider to the injured worker. Other states restrict this choice. The
Managed Care concept has been particularly successful. Managed Care techniques have reduced
inappropriate utilization and improved the quality of care.
Managed Care Organizations also monitor the performance of the utilization review nurses.
Denied cases are reviewed. Readmissions are carefully reviewed because they indicate
questionable treatment or premature discharges. Also reviewed are average lengths of stay, and
outpatient admission vs. in hospital admission.
The Managed Care Organizations then introduced the relative values scale which paid a fixed
percent of the areas Usual Customary and Reasonable fees. Still fees rose, and discounts were
from higher fees.
Managed Care Organizations then introduced fee schedules. This system applied to both doctors
and hospitals. These paid a fixed dollar amount for each procedure. With the introduction of the
schedules, medical costs rose much more slowly.
Then Managed Care Organizations introduced another reimbursement system which was more
effective in transferring the cost risk to the hospital or doctor. First came the per diem
reimbursement, paying the hospital a fixed rate for each day of the stay. This controlled the
daily rate, but not the number of days of hospitalization. Then the “per case” system was
introduced. The hospital was now paid based on the patient’s diagnosis. The hospital was paid
the same amount regardless of how long the patient remained in the hospital.
If you consider the principles of risk management, this is a very fair arrangement. For most
cases, the hospital can control the cost. Therefore the hospital should be responsible for the cost
in most cases. However, sometimes the patient brings a physical condition that neither the
hospital nor the plan foresaw. He is admitted to the hospital for one condition, and it turns out
that he has a far more complicated condition that nobody knew about. Now the plan, which
really has a function as an insurer, is a better position to handle the risk of the added cost .
The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 classified an HMO as an employee
benefit, and essentially immune from lawsuit. Many cases have revolved around death due to
delay. For example, a doctor prescribes a test that the HMO refuses to pay for. The patient dies
because he’s not diagnosed and treated soon enough. And surviving family members sue,
claiming that more timely treatment would have saved the patient’s life. A similar lawsuit
blamed an HMO for delay in treatment because it would not pay for an ambulance. By the time
an ambulance was called, paramedics found the patient dead.
The HMO defended itself in public by claiming it is not responsible for the quality of medical
care because they do not give medical care, they only pay for it. Malpractice suits are on the
rise. There have been numerous out of court settlements. While the HMO cannot be sued based
on the standards of care, skillful attorneys have found other grounds on which to bring suit.
A California jury awarded actual and punitive damages of $89 million to the surviving family
members of a woman who died of breast cancer because the HMO refused to pre-certify
treatment, claiming that the treatment was experimental.
The HMO would not be responsible for the actions of an independent contractor. However, an
independent contractor is usually allowed to decide how we will provide services. Under that
same contract the doctor will not be paid unless he follows HMO guidelines and methods.
Whether someone is an independent contractor, an employee, or something else is not a matter
that the parties can agree to. The law decides if someone is an independent contractor or
something else. Did the HMO control the doctor? That is a question of fact to be decided by a
jury. Jury sympathy obviously favors the individual rather than the HMO.
HMOs claimed that medical malpractice suits are actually declining because of the presence of
Managed Care. After all, they do screen providers and they do determine which methods of
treatment work best. Also, since HMOs pay the doctor a monthly fee per patient rather than on a
per treatment basis, doctors do not engage in unnecessary or unwanted procedures. Those
procedures had been grounds for malpractice suits under indemnity plans.
A few years ago New Jersey went so far as to cover HMOs under consumer protection
regulations. HMOs had to disclose their physicians incentive plans. Members were given a
choice of specialists. Staff doctors were given the responsibility for denying requests for
medical treatment. This discretion was taken away from nurses and non medical people. HMOs
have to undergo state evaluation every three years. An ombudsman in the form of a utilization
review panel will now hear member appeals.
Legislators are also concerned that HMOs have not paid their share for research and education.
For example, if the HMO only purchases generic drugs, they have not paid the pharmaceutical
firm that developed the drug in the first place. If they will not pay higher fees at a teaching
hospital, they are not paying to develop the next doctors.
Using an in network provider is highly advantageous. Under the contract with the plan, the
doctor or hospital can only charge the plan the agreed-upon amount. Furthermore, the doctor or
hospital can only charge the patient the copayment agreed to in the plan. The patient never pays
more than that. This guarantees the patient a small out of pocket cost.
Today most plans have a wide choice of physician, and the patient may access any one in a broad
network. This is only restricted where there is a gatekeeper. Many plans are discontinuing the
use of gatekeepers.
HMOs restricted patients to in network physicians, and paid nothing out of network. PPOs
started off by offering the typical low copayment for it in network service.
Here is the big difference between HMOs and Preferred Provider Organizations: PPOs also
provided some payment out of network.
Under HMOs or PPO’s, the patient is free of filling out the claim form. The doctor or hospital
does that.
The agent must understand how important it is to a patient to be able to see a doctor he or she
prefers and to have a health plan pay for the office visit. Sometimes an out of network doctor is
needed. The agent should be familiar with the expression OON which means “out of network.”
When HMOs were first introduced, it was very painful for the patient and his family to have to
change doctors because the old doctor was no longer in the network. It is very important to
remember that many health care plans have what is called “plan instability”. This means that the
plans reduce compensation to the doctors and hospitals to a point where the doctors and hospitals
refuse to see patients covered by the plan. Now a patient who has been seeing that doctor has to
switch to one who is still covered by the plan. This provides a dissatisfied employee.
Plan instability is the leading reason for short term doctor-patient relationships.
Preferred Provider Organizations provide some coverage for a doctor who is out of network.
This increases the employee’s chances of being able to stay with the same doctor or hospital year
after year.
People have come to realize that they will be covered by plans and have to abide by plan rules.
Because the out of network payments involved a high annual deductible and a large co-payment,
the patient learned to stay in network. This is called steerage.
Steerage is very important to the in-service provider because it provides him with patients.
Steerage works mainly by being far less expensive for the patient. Also the preventive care that
most patients want is only available on an in network basis. There are minor steerage techniques
such as the “eight hundred” phone numbers to call for in network referrals, the fact that the
provider will be listed in the plan’s directory, and newsletters to members.
The provider benefits by prompt payment and by having no collection problems. There is also
simplicity of administration because of standardized payments and co-payments.
The overall strategy in day-to-day operation has much in common with an HMO. The PPO
selects medical providers on the basis of cost effectiveness which means their willingness to
work for a fee and to get the job done with a minimum of office visits. The provider’s reputation
is important and so is their malpractice history.
The provider must be willing to accept negotiated rates that are below the normal UCR-Usual
Customary and Reasonable.
The provider must subscribe to utilization management. This means they may not over utilize
The higher premium plans reimburse the provider at 100 percent for in network service. They
reimbursed the same percent for out of network claims. There are also deductibles and co-
payment.
The low premium plans reimburse at 80 percent in network, and 60 percent out of network. They
also have deductibles and co-payments. PPOs have had rapid growth because of out of network
payments. There is the fear that a patient will need care when he is outside of the plan’s
geographic network. There is also the concern that a family member might need a specialist who
is not in the network. In one two year period the number of employees insured in a PPO grew
from 23 percent to 38 percent of persons covered by health insurance. There is assurance that
some payments will be made for care by doctors and hospitals outside of the network. That is
very important to people covered by the plan.
Even in a market dominated by Preferred Provider Organizations, which did better in the smaller
markets, one study indicated that a community would need a population of the least 180,000
people and three managed-care plans in order to have enough competition
There is one very important difference. These plans use a gatekeeper arrangement. Referral to a
specialist by the primary care physician is required, even if the specialist is a part of the EPO
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 29
A Better CE
network. A specialist can be used as a primary care physician.
Some EPO plans provide out of network coverage, but the benefits are even less than a PPO, as
low as 50 percent of the in network benefit. Subscribers to an EPO make very little use of out of
network providers. EPOs are regulated under standard insurance law. HMOs are regulated under
laws designed only for HMOs.
Just to go over the history again very briefly, HMOs began by offering very little choice of
physicians within the plan and absolutely no coverage outside the plans. PPOs were therefore
founded to give the insured person more of a choice of physician. He could be covered by an in
network physician for a low co-payment. Preferred Provider Organizations however also gave
some coverage if covered persons saw a physician outside the network.
The HMOs responded to this by offering out of network coverage. It was only offered as a rider
at extra premium. This is a plan which may be attached to an HMO. It is an optional feature.
Preferred Provider Organizations do not need this option, as out of network coverage is already a
feature of a Preferred Provider Organization.
The point of service means the time of service. At that time, the insured or his family member
may seek treatment in network or out of network. They make this choice each and every time
they need medical service. If they remain in network all costs are covered except for a small co-
payment. If they go out of network they will have to pay a large deductible that is probably $750
per person per year. There is also a 30 percent co-payment. Out of network coverage very often
has a stop loss. At the stop loss point the insured no longer has to pay out of his own pocket. The
insurer pays all cost above the stop loss. The stop loss will be high for out of network coverage.
This steers the insured into using only network doctors and hospitals.
B. MORE STEERAGE
If the insured goes outside of network, there is no need to see the gatekeeper. The insured will
choose the physician. He will pay the high deductible and high coinsurance. Because he is not
seeing the doctor under a plan, the doctor is by no means limited in what he can charge. The
insured will begin with that doctor’s highest rate before paying the deductible and coinsurance.
That is why the vast majority of patients covered by point of service plan remain in network.
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 30
A Better CE
This is also called steerage. The high cost of going out of network steers them back into the
network.
However the POS plan has historically proven to be a great approach to introducing employees
to managed care. Remember that in the old-fashioned indemnity plans, the insured had
deductibles and coinsurance, and paid the doctors highest price. Here he has a choice of very low
co-payment in network, or deductibles and coinsurance with an out of network physician. He
quickly becomes comfortable staying in network. This is all the more true today as all doctors
are involved in health plans, and the choice of physicians in the network is as wide as possible.
There are other advantages. For example, the employer could offer a single plan to all of his
employees. The employee would know that he had a low co-payment in network, but still there
would be access to a specialist. On the other hand, an employee choosing a straight HMO
without POS option would be locked into the list of providers for a full year. Employee
satisfaction has been increased by the introduction of the POS option.
Many employees who are new to managed care do not understand that all visits to a specialist
must first be authorized by the primary care physician. They are surprised to find that visits to a
specialist are not covered because they were not pre authorized by the primary care physician.
They are especially surprised because they chose the specialist from among network physicians.
This leads to dissatisfaction in the early days of a plan.
Insured who are new to managed care do not understand the difference between emergency care
and urgent care. Under some plans, a medical emergency simply means that the patient must be
driven to the hospital right away, but a ride in a passenger car is enough. Medically urgent
means that it ambulance is necessary. Plans do not pay for an ambulance ride unless the care
was medically urgent. What if a visit to the emergency room turned out to be not medically
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 31
A Better CE
necessary? For example, a man saw a bat on the door of his house. He instinctively struck it.
He then wondered if the bat was rabid. He went to the emergency room and was told that he
could not possibly have a problem. If he had not consulted his primary care physician in
advance, payment would have been denied. For others, the denial of payment for an ambulance
is a very expensive lesson.
They don’t understand that they are required to notify the primary care physician whether the
care turned out to be urgent or emergency. The result is that benefits could be denied. This
leads to dissatisfaction early on, but eventually they learn how to work within the system, and
they are quite satisfied.
IX. CREDENTIALING
A. CREDENTIALING MCOs
Managed Care Organizations have a credentialing concern of their own. They’re concerned
about accreditation from the National Committee on Quality Assurance, the American
Association of Preferred Provider Organizations, or the Utilization Review Accreditation
Commission. As an agent you can check with every one of those credentialing organizations on
the Internet. Health care organizations that do not have a favorable rating from those groups have
a harder time selling their plans..
Agents must exercise care in recommending a policy: Some group health plans set
artificially low limits on the maximum payment. Make sure the policy you choose offers
at least $1 million of coverage, since costs for treating catastrophic illnesses can easily
reach these astronomical amounts.
Also, watch out for low reimbursement levels. Some policies pay a set maximum per
procedure, which can be far less than what physicians in your area actually charge. If
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 32
A Better CE
the claim payment falls short of the bill, the patient can be left paying the difference. To
avoid this, you may want to check with a physician’s bookkeeper to see if
reimbursement levels are within the normal billing range.
If you are evaluating PPOs or POSs, avoid overpaying for the flexibility they offer
through high deductibles and co-insurance. Be wary of policies that require patients to
co-insure more than 25 percent of the cost of treatment or that continue to charge co-
insurance for costs in excess of $10,000.
Coverage and features Virtually all group health plans cover hospital care and
emergency care. Most also cover outpatient care, which includes routine exams, lab
work, and office visits. But group health plans can vary significantly in other areas. You
may find that some do not include treatments such as prenatal and postpartum
maternity care, prescription drugs, and ambulance service. They may have very
different deductibles or co-insurance fees in these areas.
Pay particular attention to provisions for long-term treatments such as mental health or
substance abuse. Some group health plans offer insufficient coverage in these areas.
Also check provisions for long-term illnesses and restrictions for pre-existing health
conditions (such as diabetes or asthma).
Doctors The quality of physicians participating in the network can be the most difficult
area to assess, although it is arguably the most important.
Inquire about the screening process that is used to sign up physicians. A screening
process should ideally include checks of the doctor's background, including analysis of
any previous malpractice issues.
Also ask how many physicians in the network the American Board of Medical
Specialties has certified. To be certified, a physician must demonstrate competency in a
specialty by passing tests or meeting training requirements. Ideally, 85 percent or more
of the physicians should be board-certified.
Though it is not unusual for HMO and PPO networks to be enormous, some group
health plans sign up doctors simply to boost their numbers. To get a better sense of the
actual availability of doctors in the network, ask what percentage of its doctors actually
accepts new patients.
A final statistic to evaluate is the physician turnover rate. This can give you a good
indication of the likelihood that you will be forced to switch doctors. The turnover rate
can also indicate how satisfied physicians are with the rules for treatment and
reimbursement within the network. Better programs usually have a turnover rate of 3
percent to 5 percent.
Grievances Save your employees many potential problems by researching how the
insurers resolve grievances from plan members. Quality organizations should have a
set procedure in place for airing disagreements before a grievance board. A clearly
outlined appeals process gives members a way to protest unfair reimbursement levels
or other problems.
Consulting the state Department of Insurance, which keeps records of patient
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 33
A Better CE
complaints, may shed some light regarding patient satisfaction. If there are a lot of
outstanding grievances from current plan members, a warning flag should go up.
B. CREDENTIALING PROVIDERS
Managed care can improve quality rather than reduce it. This is done first by credentialing
providers. HMOs have actually been found liable for their failure to thoroughly credential
providers. The courts found that Managed Care Organizations have a duty to reasonably
investigate the reputation of participating physicians. The court felt that if unqualified or
incompetent physicians were used, that would be an unreasonable risk of harm to the patient.
1. CREDENTIALING PHYSICIANS
The credentialing process for physicians is very straight forward. After determining that the
physician is properly licensed and has acquired the proper medical education, the managed-care
organization looks to see if he has a Drug Enforcement Agency certificate enabling him to
dispense narcotic drugs. You may be surprised to learn that many physicians do not have that
certificate.
What do the hospitals think of this doctor? Have they given him admitting privileges? This is an
important indicator because the doctor will need to admit patients to a hospital. More
importantly, other doctors who are familiar with his work review it before granting admitting
privileges.
Patients would certainly take board certification to be an indication of the quality of a physician.
There is an interesting division of opinion in the medical profession. Many take the obvious path
of reason that a physician who has gotten himself certified must be a better physician. Others
feel the board certification is a measure of excellence, meaning more knowledge and ability to
express that knowledge. They doubt it is a measure of competence. Health plans are interested
in the competence of the doctor. Competence refers to how quickly he can provide a cure.
Board certification is no measure of treatment outcome. Treatment outcome has an obvious
economic effect.
All an agent has to do to check physicians is to conduct an internet search. Type “Credentialing
Physicians” in the search box( I used Google) and several web sites will be available. Health
Grades or Choice Trust gives a complete report on any doctor, for a slight charge. State medical
Boards also provide this information free of charge.
While this data bank can not be used by the general public, it can be used by an attorney or
anyone suing a doctor or hospital.
This data bank was created by an act of Congress in 1986. Its purpose was to discourage bad
medical practice and to encourage good medical practice. It covers reports about doctors,
hospitals, dentists and other health-care professionals. The data bank is operated by the
Department of Health and Human Services of the federal government
Hospitals are required to check with the National Practitioner Data Bank whenever they grant
privileges to a doctor. They are also required to check with the Data Bank every two years
thereafter. The National Practitioner Data Bank can only be accessed by insurance companies or
attorneys.
Should an agent believe that changing from a hospital with a 1.7% mortality rate to a hospital
with a 2.7% mortality rate is doing the best job for the insured persons? Agents must consider
this in evaluating any plan.
URAC is made up of representatives from all groups that are involved: consumers, providers,
employers, regulators and industry experts. Today, over 500 committee volunteers and 30 paid
staff help run the organization. However, it is not controlled in any way by the insurance industry
or any managed-care organization.
As an agent you can look up the accreditation of any health care plan that you are selling as well
as the accreditation of any doctor or hospital or other health-care organization or provider. You
can do this at no charge.
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 36
A Better CE
Assisted living residencies and behavioral health care organizations also receive accreditation.
They also accredit home health care organizations. They even evaluate clinical laboratories.
They also accredit general hospitals as well as hospitals for children and hospitals for
rehabilitation, and psychiatric hospitals. JCAHO also accredits ambulatory care facilities.
The method of operation is an onsite survey at least once every three years. JCAHO accreditation
is an important symbol of quality. JCAHO has developed the standards by which these
organizations are accredited..
What does this mean to the producer or the health care buyer? JCAHO has a WebSite entitled
Quality Check. It lists 20,000 health care provider facilities and their accreditation status.
Individual reports are available for each accredited organization. This allows the buyer of a
health plan to check out the facilities included in that health plans network
JCAHO released the status of testing a number of health plans. In one year, 29 percent received
a full three-year accreditation, while 41 percent received a one-year approval. This accreditation
is only bestowed on the best plans. Agents can check on the status of a plan by asking for a CD-
ROM disk or going to their WebSite. The agent can check on both health care providers and
plans on the JCAHO website.
URAC uses standards developed by bringing together experts from across the country and
determining what standards are appropriate at the time. URAC begins by asking the health care
organization to document their compliance with the standard. URAC carefully checks to make
sure that the documentation fits the facts.
Managed Care Organizations seek to be accredited because they want to demonstrate to their
customers that they are impartially reviewed, and have been found to be up to the standard.
Managed Care Organizations can also improve their quality because URAC identifies areas were
improvements may be needed to keep up with changes in the rest of the industry. Finally,
Managed Care Organizations seek accreditation because state laws require them to be
independently reviewed.
NCQA- the National Committee for Quality Assurance rates the performance of HMOs. In fact,
the quality gains are the largest ever measured. More than half of HMO patients give the plans
high marks for customer service and claims processing. NCQA bases its reports on data
submitted by 466 health plans which cover 51 million lives. There is still a lot of room for
improvement in the treatment of diabetes and depression.
NCQA ratings are highly significant because many employers will not deal with an insurer that
does not have accreditation from NCQA.
This is very important for individual purchasers of health insurance also. That is because plans
have open enrollment every year. Individuals may apply during this time, and may not be
declined. The employee would do well to look up the NCQA rating of a plan before enrolling.
Seventy-five percent of the people enrolled in HMOs are in plans that have been accredited by
NCQA. Accreditation is strictly voluntary, and applies only to health plans, not traditional
insurance.
NCQA developed in important body of information called HEDIS- Health Plan Employer Data
and Information Set. NCQA requires HEDIS information for accreditation. As the name suggests,
this is information that employers look at in evaluating managed-care plans.
There are six categories NCQA looks at during the accreditation process. This information is
reported in HEDIS.
1. What is the health plan doing to improve the quality of patient care?
2. What are the credentials of the health care providers?
3. What preventive programs are offered?
4. Utilization review issues: how does this plan make decisions about covering treatment?
5. How good is its medical record keeping system?
6. How does this plan treat member’s rights and responsibilities? This refers to the process the
plan has put in place for a member to appeal a claim which has been denied. Another part of this
issue is how the plan discloses its policies and procedures to members.
The next part of this issue is whether or not this plan has a “gag clause”. This clause prevents
doctors from discussing treatment not covered by the plan, or treatments the plan does not wish to
pay for.
Many of the larger employers require that any health plan they offer to employees must carry the
NCQA accreditation.
Essentially, the savings account for medical care is tax deductible, and the policy is high
deductible.
This provides savings in health care costs because employees will start off spending their own
money.
Health Savings Accounts are the best and latest version of Medical Savings Accounts!
The new Health Savings Account legislation was signed into law by President Bush on December
8, 2003. The new HSA is really the "next generation" of MSA plans. Although some aspects of
the program remain the same, there are some important changes. Very few people fail to qualify
for a Health Savings Account. Most of those who fail to qualify are simply persons who are listed
as dependents on someone else’s tax return.
Think of Health Savings Accounts as an improvement over Medical Savings Accounts. Here are
the improvements:
Policy deductibles can now be as low as $2000 for a family and $1000 for single person. Under
Health Savings Accounts the full deductible can be contributed every year. That is quite an
improvement over Medical Savings Accounts
The best way to explain a Health Savings Account for client is that it is very much like an IRA
except that any distribution from it must be earmarked for a medical expense. It is tax sheltered in
the same manner as in IRA. Earnings grow untaxed.
One hundred percent of the amount that a client deposits into a Health Savings Account is tax
deductible.
Paying medical bills out of the account is easy. Just write a check. There will be no tax on the
money from a Health Savings Account that is spent on medical care. This is very good for the
self-employed.
What if medical expenses are greater than the amount deposited into the Health Savings Account?
The other part of a Health Savings Account is a catastrophic health insurance policy.
Catastrophic means that the deductible is high. Because the deductible is high, the premium is
low.
For example, a self-employed individual can use the savings from buying a low premium high
deductible account to fund his Health Savings Account. Also be familiar with the term HDHP
which means high deductible health policy.
Larger medical expenses are covered by a low-cost, high deductible health insurance policy. What
is not used from the tax advantaged savings account each year stays in the account and continues
to grow interest on a tax-favored basis to supplement retirement. The funds can also be used in
retirement to cover medical expenses. The older people get, the more they spend on medical care.
Having this money saved for future medical expenses is very good planning.
The client will get a number of advantages from replacing the traditional health plan coverage
which has become very expensive.
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 40
A Better CE
He will not be restricted by an HMO network. When he has to use his plan he relies on a large
network of physicians. Using a preferred provider organization plan he will have access to a large
number of physicians.
Also, he can use his Health Savings Account to pay for dental expenses and other medically
related expenses which his health plan does not cover. There is no limit to the amount of money
that can accumulate in his Health Savings Account if he does not withdraw from it. Like an IRA,
all the earnings in the account grow untaxed. Of course the money may eventually be taxed if it
is withdrawn for non-medical purposes or is eventually inherited by children.
The balance left in the account at death can be willed to someone else, although it may be taxable
in the estate.
1. This leading health insurer added a medical savings account option to it’s own employee
benefits program. The deductible for an individual employee was $1000, the deductible for an
employee with family was $2000. If the deductible was satisfied, the plan paid 100 percent of
benefits over the deductible. The incentive was that unused funds from these accounts would be
returned to the employee at the end of the year. In the first year the plan returned an average of
$603 per employee. The following year it returned an average of $1002 per employee. The
insurer/employer brought in an outside firm to survey employee satisfaction. Nearly all of them
were satisfied with the plan, and intended to stay with it. Furthermore they saw it as an important
part of health care reform.
2. A hospital in the Northeast introduced a similar plan. It was in force for 10 years. The plan
experienced a reduction not only in the cost of health-care, but also a profound reduction in the
number of sick days. Unfortunately, the plan was dropped due to regulatory concerns. After the
plan was dropped, health-care costs doubled. It is important to note that the employees handled
the money in their savings accounts in a very responsible way.
4. In the mid-1980s, a large publishing firm was experiencing nearly $5000 per employee medical
insurance costs. The first thought was that even though employees were paying part of the
premium, the company wanted to reward employees who were filing small amounts of claims.
The offer was that if an employee filed less than $500 in claims, he would receive the difference
between $500 and the claims he filed. The difference was doubled. An employee filing $300 in
claims would receive a $400 bonus, and the employer paid the tax on the bonus.
There was a 23 percent reduction in claims per person in the first year. There was a $400,000
reduction in claims paid, and a $30,000 administrative savings. $125,000 in bonuses were paid to
employees. This plan did not even have a medical savings account for the employees. Even
though it was just an out and out bonus, it was highly successful.
An early analysis of these plans showed reduced health-care spending, as employees and their
families became more involved in their healthcare decisions. The use of preventive services
increased. This shows that the employees were not only showing restraint, but common sense as
well.
A four-year pilot program was established for firms having 50 or fewer employees. Many rules
benefited the employee. Among them was one that the account was a tax-exempt trust or
custodial account, which is a bank account dedicated to medical expenses. It is established for the
benefit of the employee, and it is portable. The employee can take another job, and the fund
remains his.
We are reviewing history because clients may remember it that way. The regulations required
catastrophic insurance policies with deductibles for individuals ranging from $1500 to $2250.
For families, the deductible had to range between $3000 and $4500. The stop loss for individuals
was $3000 per year, $5500 per year for families. Annual contributions to these funds could not
equal the full deductible. That is because the amounts were allowed to accumulate tax deferred
year after year. Annual contributions for an individual could be no more than 65 percent of the
deductible in any one year. Annual contributions for families could be no more than 75 percent
of the deductible in any one year. Up until age 65, there was a 15 percent penalty for any funds
withdrawn for a non-medical purpose. The only exceptions were death and disability.
Medical Savings Accounts have been greatly improved by Health Savings Account legislation.
There is also the open question of whether or not employees will play the system. They might say
“I will gamble. If I get better I keep the money. If I really get sick, the insurance pays”. Time
will tell. Managed-care organizations have their own response to these plans. They are offering
high deductible network plans. This would reduce the premium, and allow the employee to
assume some of the risk. In fact as we have seen from the four examples, employees are very
responsible with the plan money.
If the child is covered by a colleges’ health plan, he is no longer eligible when he graduates.
Suppose that upon graduation, he or she accepts employment with an employer who does not
provide health coverage, or does not provide it right away. Suppose he or she does not even find
employment right away? Health insurance is always available. Anything is available at a price.
The question is whether or not it is affordable. Too many people in their mid ‘20s choose to go
without it. The problem is that they cannot afford to be without it. All it takes is one accident
while in a car or on a skate board, one surprise illness, or one broken ankle on the ski slope or
basketball court. A serious illness, the cost of which is not covered by insurance, can leave a
young person in debt for years.
There is a full range of coverages available. They begin with basic hospital insurance, which only
pays in case of hospitalization and might cost $20 a month. The young person can also purchase
a comprehensive health plan coverage that will cover not only hospitalization, but physicians and
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 43
A Better CE
prescriptions, and more. Maternity, always a risk for youth, is not covered.
The young man or woman can purchase catastrophic coverage. As the name implies, the
deductible is very high and the maximum benefit is in the millions. In some cases the deductible
is as high as $15,000. While the premium is only $38 a month, what youngster could afford that
deductible? Doctor visits would not be covered, and neither would a visit to the emergency room
for a few stitches. Ten days of intensive care, following an accident on the ski slope or in a car
would be covered. The pregnancy might not be covered, but complications of the pregnancy
would be.
Some of the larger companies offer deductibles ranging between $500 and $2500, with an 80/20
coinsurance option available. The stop loss limit is $10,000, with a $2 million maximum.
Premiums range from $50.22 per month for the $500 deductible plan to $26.04 for the $2500
deductible plan.
This is characterized by a high deductible, in exchange for which the insured gets a low premium.
Otherwise, he could not afford the high deductible. The health insurance buyer has to decide if he
is more comfortable with the high deductible or the higher premium. If someone can only afford
a $25 premium, how is he going to pay the deductible?
The rates compare favorably with those of the indemnity plan. Younger people choose a lower
deductible. Older people choose a higher deductible to offset higher premiums.
It is important to notice the way the deductible works. It is a per claim deductible. The
deductible must be met each and every time there is a claim. After the deductible 80/20
coinsurance applies. This is true no matter how short the term.
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 44
A Better CE
Eligibility is also a problem. Any applicant who has ever been denied health insurance will not
be issued a short term policy. This is understandable when we consider the enormous adverse
selection risk. Uninsured with all kinds of health problems would be seeking this coverage. For
the same reason, anyone with a pre-existing condition would be automatically denied. The usual
look back for pre-existing conditions is five years. Pregnancy is not covered, but complications
of pregnancy usually are. People working in hazardous industries or who play professional or
amateurs’ sports will also not be covered.
These policies are not renewable. To continue coverage, the insured would have to fill out a new
application.
Suppose the insured is looking forward to a job and health benefits, and he does not get the job?
He has no right to renew. He may only reapply and hope to be accepted again. If he used the
policy, that would mean he now has a preexisting condition. He would not be eligible for a new
policy.
If the need for insurance arises because the insured has left a job that has coverage, COBRA is
available. If the employed parent loses a job, the child can be left without insurance. We think of
COBRA as a law under which an employee whose position is terminated may continue to be
insured under the employers plan. The employee could continue the coverage for 18 months, or
24 months in Connecticut, reimbursing the former employer for the cost of coverage. The
important point here is a dependent, spouse or child, may continue that coverage for 36 months.
What we are concerned with is whether or not that is a good decision.
COBRA should not be recommended if the child is healthy. That is because the premium is much
higher than an individual policy or a short term policy for a young person. It could be several
hundred dollars a month for COBRA versus the $25 to $50 range for the short term or individual
policy.
Therefore short term health insurance is the first place the agent should have the child apply. That
is because it will cost a lot less than COBRA.
Of course if the young person has a health problem for which individual or short-term policies
would be declined, then he would be better off with COBRA. COBRA allows terminated
employees to continue coverage. A college student is not an employee, and therefore may not
have COBRA coverage under a college health plan after graduation.
D. AN ETHICAL APPROACH
It would be hoped that young people purchase health insurance. The idea of these policies is to
spread risk over the population and over time. The premiums that young people pay represent the
risk that they bring the pool. The same is true of older people who bring a greater risk, and pay a
higher premium. Healthy young people do send money to the pool and help keep costs down for
insured of all ages.
Individual policies are for those in relatively good health, and who have no other choice.
Most states offer a health insurance plan to those in the “high-risk pool”. These plans are very
expensive and may have a long waiting period or other gaps in coverage.
Short term Health coverage is preferable for the child who recently became too old to be covered
under a parents plan. It is cheaper than COBRA.
Connecticut is typical of a number of states in requiring licensed health care insurers to provide
coverage for those who are not able to obtain it in the regular market. A young person with a
health problem could apply to a health reinsurance association.
Health Savings Accounts combine a high deductible health policy with a tax sheltered savings
account. To qualify for a tax deductible Health Savings Account, the recent graduate would have
to be self-employed or working for an employer who has such a plan. Here the insured may
contribute all of the policy’s deductible to a tax sheltered savings account.
If the young person finds himself impoverished, and can prove it, Medicaid will cover the health
costs.
There are also free clinics for those who can prove low income status.
This allows workers who are self-employed to get insurance at regular rates. Previously they paid
much more because they did not qualify for group rates. Premiums are expected to be less than
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 46
A Better CE
what small employer’s pay, but there has been a scaling back in benefits. HMOs in the state are
required to participate. Perhaps your state will have this someday.
He might qualify to purchase the coverage as group insurance. This is true as small a group as he
or she is, even a group of one!
What makes the choice of group coverage even better is that group plans have to meet state and
federal guidelines that are stricter than individual plans. To qualify in Connecticut with a certain
leading health insurer, the home business owner would have to show proof that he is indeed a
legitimate home business. He will have to show state and federal tax forms. The other
requirement is that he works at least 30 hours a week at his home-based business. He has to have
been in business for at least three consecutive months. These requirements will vary from
company to company, and state to state.
The producer will have be alert because there are numerous places that the home business owner
can go to for his coverage. He can go to his local Chamber of Commerce, or another business
group, but will have to pay fees. The agent can usually produce the coverage for less. Of course
if the prospect for insurance goes to a trade group, he may not have the coverage options that a
producer can show him. The group will probably have one plan. He could go directly to an
insurance company, but the agent can offer a choice of companies. That is the independent
producers’ greatest strength. The agent can also give guidance about how much of a deductible
the home business owner can afford. Younger people might be able to afford the deductible
because they don’t have many health charges during the year. Older people might be able to
afford a larger deductible because they have had time to accumulate the cash reserve. A lot
depends on how the client feels about it. Some are comfortable with the higher premium, others
are comfortable with a high deductible and a lower premium.
Eighty percent of benefit managers to turn to their broker first for advice, seventy percent say that
the broker greatly influences their decision.
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 47
A Better CE
Is the broker suggesting ways to cut costs? Is the broker discussing legislative changes that affect
the cost of health care? Has the broker discussed cafeteria benefit plans or anything else that
would save the employer money? Has he suggested Health Savings Accounts? The businessman
should always remember that the broker is getting a commission. Is he working for it?
The first thing the employer should be concerned with is the financial standing of the insurer. If
that is good, he should then consider the doctor bills and co-payments and whether his employees
will be satisfied with the drug formulary.
The employer should always check the finer points of the plan. Here is an example: One employer
found that he was paying for a bigger network than he needed. Some of the doctors in the network
he was paying for were too far away for the employees to get to. Now he is paying less premium
for a smaller network having only eliminated the doctors who were too far away.
Another cost saving feature for employers is multi tier hospital coverage. Hospitals are rated in
tiers. A tier 1 hospital offers standard services and is good for most procedures. A tier 2 hospital
is more highly rated and covers more sophisticated procedures. Tier three is top of the line. A tier
1 hospital would have the lowest co pay in the plan. A tier 3 hospital would have the highest co
pay in the plan. This saves the employer money. Of course we have the old standbys of raising
deductibles and co pays. And of course today many employers are requiring the employees to pay
a share of the premium. But where does all this leave the employee? It leaves him paying part of
the premium or large co payments or deductibles.
Many employers are now being careful not to cover the spouse of an employee if that spouse has
coverage where he or she works.
Some of the larger employers have been saving money through self-insurance. Some of the
money that would have been paid for premium is used to pay employee health costs. What if
health costs are particularly high in a bad year? The employer buys stop loss insurance. Stop loss
pays if the claims per employee, or total claims for the year, exceed a certain point. This is done
because the stop loss premium is a lot lower than a regular health insurance premium.
Some employers have simply joined with other employers to form a pool. This saves money by
insuring a larger group of employees. The savings come from the fact that the larger the group the
smaller a percentage of the premium goes for administrative costs. If you insure just a few
people, as much as 40% of the premium may be taken up in administrative costs. If you ensure a
thousand people, administration only cost 5% of the premium. Creating a pool gives those
savings.
Some employers save money by using a Professional Employer Organization. They handle all of
the benefits, payroll etc. They purchase insurance for many employers. This puts many employers
in the same group, which saves administrative costs and provides lower premium.
Finally we have the good old insurance technique of avoiding or preventing losses the first-place.
Let’s consider a Washington D.C. law firm that found rising health insurance premiums with a
major carrier, and decided to save 30 percent by switching to local HMO. One of the partners
found out that the particular HMO had been denied accreditation by the National Committee for
Quality Assurance (NCQA). The law firm decided not to use the HMO, but instead to enroll with
a Preferred Provider Organization. They were promised only a $15 co-pay for office visit.
Technically, that was correct. However, employees were required to pay the entire fee at the time
of visit, and wait a long time for reimbursement by the PPO. That is because doctors got tired of
waiting for that particular PPO to pay them.
The employer did not obtain the employee satisfaction that he thought his premium would buy.
Producers of this coverage stress price, but they should balance it with service and quality.
Remember that what the employer wants to buy with his premium dollar is employee satisfaction.
Two competing plans might offer a five dollar co-payment. But which plan has the better
formulary? Some plans have a closed formulary, and will only pay for certain pharmaceuticals.
Other plans have an open formulary, and will cover all pharmaceuticals. Many plans are in
between those two extremes. If the employer is a small one, it would be good to check if
pharmaceuticals needed by his family members or key employees are covered. Does the plan
have other limits that might present problems later on?
How quickly does the plan pay claims, and how long does an appeal take? HMOs minimize
paperwork, some PPOs require the employee to file claim forms for reimbursement.
Suppose an employee needs emergency treatment. Does the plan require prior approval in all
cases? Or does the plan use the “any prudent lay person” standard? This would pay for
emergency treatment if a prudent lay person would seek it, without prior approval.
What out of pocket expenses will the employee have? Are there deductibles? What is the co-
payment? Do out-of-pocket expenses vary from one benefit to the next? For example, would
mental health benefits have a higher co-payment? Is there an extra high co-payment for brand-
name prescription drugs, as opposed to generic drugs?
Is the plan the subject of too frequent complaints with the State Insurance Department or Better
Business Bureau?
If the employee appeals the denial of the benefit, who decides? Is there an internal appeals
process in which the plan makes all the decisions? Is it an external process, where an outside
party makes the decision? Is third party arbitration provided for? How does the appeals process
work on an overall basis? How long does it take to settle a problem?
Does the plan have limitations and exclusions on certain procedures and treatments such as
transplants, infertility, mental health, drug therapies, durable medical equipment?
The wise employer will ask for the names of other employers who have used the plan.
The same questions are also good to ask about individual plans.
The employers who have less than 5000 employees, the ones producers are most likely to see,
consider cost because it is nearly the only thing that they understand. The smaller employer does
not have the time or the resources to fully analyze the plans or the providers. They do understand
accreditation. Many an HMO has lost employer accounts after losing accreditation.
Employers do understand what employees want. In the labor market that we have, employees are
likely to get what they want. Provider choice is always near the top of the employee’s wish list.
That is why Point of Service plans are becoming so popular. Employees want satisfaction from
their plan. Satisfaction to most employees comes from knowing that they are covered by a plan
that has in excellent reputation. Many report cards are based on satisfaction issues rather than the
performance of the plans providers. The importance of HEDIS is that it is based on performance.
Employers care about quality. They are just not getting the information that they need. It is very
difficult to compare outcomes from one plan to another. The average employer and employee
simply do not understand how the plans work. That is why they are more likely to think about
cost rather than quality.
These report cards allow plans to say to the employer “we can provide a high level of service”,
and “we can improve your workers level of productivity”. For example, one plan was able to
reduce time lost due to asthma with better healthcare. That definitely got the employers attention.
This gives us the all-important competition between plans on the basis of care delivered. That is
what employees really want to see. There is a movement to establish a “quality index”. This
would take away a lot of the complexity and mystery, and give the public a simple method of
comparison between plans.
Health Net, a California Provider, tied doctor reimbursement to report card performance. That
provides competition between providers on the basis of quality.
One small construction company drastically reduced its health care premiums by placing itself in
the hands of a PEO. That is a Professional Employer Organization.
Professional Employer Organizations enter into contracts with small and medium-size businesses.
Under those contracts the PEO manages human resource and personnel functions for the small
business. The PEO will not only pay wages, but report collect and then pay in all payroll related
taxes. They handle all reports. They manage coverage and claims for workers compensation.
They ensure safety as well as compliance with all regulations relating to employment. They go so
far as to hand out employee hand books.
For the health insurance producer, there is the question of what the employer is willing to do. Is
he willing to what let the PEO become a co employer of his employees? That is exactly what
happens. The employer retains ownership of his business. However, he becomes an employee of
the PEO. While the owner of the business does not give up his independence in operating the
business, he certainly gives up the feeling of independence. Some employers will do this, and
some will not. The employer is independent enough to set salaries, but the PEO is responsible for
payment.
PEOs have grown greatly in the last twenty years. They allowed the purchase of health coverage
in a single package for every employee they cover, regardless of how many firms are involved.
They can offer a minimal package of benefits or a maximum package of benefits. Either way, the
employer is better off then if he tried to purchase the benefits himself. They can offer an HMO,
with or without a POS, and are planning to offer PPOs. Dental and vision plans are also
available.
Some PEOs offer retirement savings plans, credit unions, disability insurance, life insurance.
Some even provide behavioral health assistance, education benefits, and more. The small
employer would have great difficulty in matching any of those benefits.
Additionally, PEOs are not required to be licensed in Connecticut or New York. There have been
cases of PEOs operating unscrupulously by failing to provide workers compensation and
healthcare benefits for enrolled employees. A dishonest firm simply pocketed the premium and
departed. Some are undercapitalized, which also leads to financial disaster. Clients can well be
advised to hire an attorney.
The PEO will also be very careful about the businesses it becomes involved with. It will review
the employer’s financial records, workers, claims and safety records, and more. It will review
risk management plans, and whether taxes are paid on time. They also analyze the payroll to
determine the rate of employee turnover. The PEO has no obligation to retain any specific
employee. Also if the employer fails to pay the PEO, the PEO can sue.
The number of companies with 200 or fewer employees who offer health benefits is actually
down.
It was 68% in 2001, and 63% in 2004. How did things get this way? One of the answers is that
in the 1990s when help were very hard to get and very hard to keep, employers improved health
care benefits with low co-payments and of course would not ever have fought to make the
employees share in paying the premium. Employees are easier to find in now and possibly even
fewer employers are offering company paid health benefits. The trend is for the employee to pay
more and more of the premium.
We have employees running for antibiotics when they get the sniffles and insurance carriers ready
to pounce with higher rates when one of the employees get sick. Can’t the employer catch a
break? Breaking out the Clorox wipes is a Band-Aid defense.
The first thing an employer should do is shop around even in good years. Insurance companies
always warn against doing this, but it is the best thing for an employer to do. According to the
Kaiser report, last year 57% of small businesses shopped for a new plan. Out of those businesses,
31% switch carriers and 34% change their health plans. What are you going to do for your client?
Employers should consider Health Savings Accounts. It reduces the cost to the employer.
In America, all of your medical expenses are covered after you become 65 years of age. In
Europe and England all medical expenses are covered from birth.
Medicare Part A covers your hospital stays and all related hospital expenses. It covers medical
care in a skilled nursing facility but only medical care. Long-term care because of aging is
definitely not covered by Medicare. Home health care is covered including intermittent nurses
and durable medical equipment such as wheelchairs. Hospice care is covered.
There is a premium for Medicare Part B which is $88.00 in 2006. The initial enrollment period is
three months before you turn 65 and three months after. Part B. Essentially covers doctor bills
and laboratory tests. It also covers home health care.
When he returned to the United States his friends thought he had been treated in a Third World
country. In fact he got exactly the treatment that he needed at no cost to himself and very low cost
to the British health-care system.
This explains why the British system costs 6% of their economy and our system costs 15% of our
economy.
Consider what would have happened if that same accident occurred in the United States. An
ambulance would have been called; there would have been emergency room charges, x-rays, a
In America everybody wants to consult a specialist. We have more specialists than other
countries. Specialists cost money.
In Britain and Europe it is as if everyone is on Medicare from the day they are born. All medical
expenses are covered for everyone. It is actually is simple as that.
Although of our medical care system requires 15% of our economy, the British system requires
only 6% of the British economy. Britons actually live a little bit longer than we do.
The key is prevention. Any British citizen can walk into a doctor’s office anytime he or she
wants to, day or night. While our system claims to emphasize prevention, we don’t seem to do it
as well as the British or Europeans. Under managed care today we are doing a lot better than we
did under our old indemnity system, but we still have a long way to go.
We rely on extensive medical treatment and the latest advances. England and Europe rely on
prevention.
Oddly enough, the result is that the United States has the lowest satisfaction rate of any English-
speaking country!
The original idea was to emphasize preventive medicine. The insured was given absolutely no
co-payment of any kind. The thought was that he would immediately take a minor condition to
the doctor before it became a major illness and a larger expense. As we shall see this was done by
imposing very tight controls. Not only was the doctor put on salary as a staff member forbidden
to see non-HMO patients, but the patient could not consult a specialist without the gate keeper
physician signing off. The plans also negotiated what they would pay for pharmaceuticals and
how much they would pay a hospital. What went wrong?
Hospitals doctors and pharmaceutical companies resisted working for less and less any way that
they could. Doctors underwent a radical cashectomy, but when have you ever met a poor doctor?
Ten years ago you saw a doctor in his own office. Now he is part of a twelve member practice.
This is because twelve doctors have more bargaining clout than one doctor with the health plans.
Hospitals are squeezed but they continue to grow and change and improve and their fees are
growing. They hire experts at billing the insurance companies.
Health plans told the pharmaceutical companies what drugs they would pay for and how much.
Pharmaceutical prices continue to go up out of sight. The health plans do not have the power to
negotiate as effectively as they would like to. They pass the higher costs on to the employer and
Better results have been produced in countries that have a single-payer. That payer is the
government. If the population wants more medical treatment, taxes are raised. British and
European taxpayers are willing to pay more taxes to get more medical care because they see direct
benefits. Americans are not sure that they get a direct return of benefit for an increase in taxes.
Therefore we are not willing to raise taxes to pay for medical benefits. It is just a difference in
attitude caused by a difference in history.
The advantage Europe and England have is that with all medical bills paid and no cost to the
patient, patients will see the doctor for a mild ailment before it gets worse. Seeing a doctor early
on is the prevention. They lead the way in prevention. That is what we do not have.
I would like to share something with you about what is happening in Canada. When the
Canadians set up their universal healthcare system, they made sure that the government was going
to be the only payer. They made it illegal to have a health insurance policy in Canada. That was a
big flaw and their system. If the government did not pay for a service, it did not exist in Canada.
In the spring of 2005,an appeals court in Canada ruled that it was against the Canadian
Constitution to outlaw private health insurance. Perhaps now private accident and health
insurance will take hold in Canada. This may make health care better in Canada. We will have to
wait to see.
Why the difference between the two systems? Because the British won’t pay for any more and
we will not settle for any less.
Spreadsheet comparison for HMOs would not show as much of the story. Premiums, out-of-
pocket costs, and out of network costs can be compared. However, there are many other factors.
All Rights Reserved, Richard Levine 56
A Better CE
Any source of material that the agent uses should be readily accessible, because in the ever-
changing world of health care financing it is necessary to stay up to date. The agent owes it to the
client to make the best comparison possible.
Would this minimize the effectiveness of managed-care plans in controlling cost? It appears that
managed care has achieved most of its cost control by restraining what is paid to providers for
each service. Requiring a few extra services should not seriously increase cost.
The Present Federal State Situation With Regard To The Insurance Industry
Federal and state regulators argue endlessly over who can best control managed care for the
benefit of the patient. The basic guidelines for resolving that argument have been in place for a
long time. In 1945 the McCarran Ferguson act gave states the responsibility for regulating
Federal regulation of managed care organizations currently includes the Department of Labor, the
Department of Health and Human Services, and the Health Care Financing Administration,
among others. There can be overlapping regulation at the state level as well. California provides
the best example. There a prepaid health plan for Medicaid patients can be regulated by the
Federal Healthcare Financing Administration, the California Department of Corporations, and the
California Department of Health services. Certainly the intrusion by the federal government
cannot make it any easier for the states to regulate managed care. The NAIC’s position is that if
the managed care organization performs an insurance function, it should be regulated by the
states. This writer agrees whole heartedly.
Federal regulators on the other hand point to inconsistencies in regulation from state to state.
They say this makes it very difficult to regulate managed care in a multi-state operation. Of
course with regard to other kinds of insurance, state insurance departments have been dealing
with variations in state to state regulation for a long time. They have been doing a very good job.
How Erisa Prevents the Employee from Suing an Employer Provided Health Plan.
ERISA means Employee Retirement Income Security Act. This law was to protect employees
from employers who simply removed money from the pension fund leaving the employees with a
penniless retirement. In the middle of this 1000 page legislation, someone inserted a paragraph
called the “Deemer Clause.” It stated that no employee benefit was to be considered as insurance
for purposes of state regulation. This meant that the state insurance departments could not touch
an employers’ health plan which did not use an insurance company. Of course the insurance
department could regulate any plan where an insurance company was used.
Health care organizations are designed to avoid state regulation. This is very unfortunate because
federal oversight has been very lax. This has led to many fraudulent health care organizations
being created, and they have cheated employers and employees out of many millions of dollars as
well as not providing healthcare. Plans that are designed to avoid state regulation do not provide
state mandated benefits.
There have been many lawsuits against employer sponsored plans which do not have to provide
state mandated benefits. Most of these lawsuits involved treatment which the plan claims to be
experimental. Generally, where the courts have found the treatment to be not experimental, the
employee has won. Where the courts have found the treatment to be experimental, the employer
sponsored plan has won. State regulators are finding ways to exert control over these
Results of ERISA
Unfortunately, over 50 percent of employees are covered by ERISA plans. These plans do not
have to provide all state mandated benefits and therefore cost the employers less. But there are
greater problems than that. They are not subject to state supervision, and do not pay state
insurance taxes. They do not have the cost of participating in guarantee funds. This has fueled a
great acceleration in the number of these plans. In a single one and a half year period over
400,000 participants in these plans were left with $123 million in unpaid claims. Insurance has
always been associated with a safety net provided by state regulation. The shift away from
indemnity plans to managed care has cut a great hole in the safety net where ERISA plans are
concerned.
States have been successful in preventing the sale of nonprofit hospitals and healthcare plans to
multi-state corporations. The concerned his been that local control over health care would be lost.
Section 2
Did You Balance Costs And Benefits Of The Plans You Offered
Due care requires that our client understand the trade-off between cost and choice. The more
choices he has of physician or hospital, the higher the premium. Is the added cost worth it to
him? The employer is looking to maximize employee satisfaction for the amount of premium he
pays.
Does he need a particular plan because a particular physician or hospital is important to him?
What does it cost him if he has to go outside of the network? Some plans definitely pay better out
of network than other plans pay inside their network. The diligent agent will compare plans and
how they pay out of network. Each plan has to be examined separately for how it pays OON-out
of network
Does your client have dependents that will soon cease to be covered by the plan? Can you
provide individual coverage for them?
Will the client’s family continue to be covered in the event of the client’s early death?
Does the client have an employee with a substandard rating on his present policy? Will the
present insurer remove the substandard rating, or will another company write the policy at
standard rates?
C. CONSUMER REPORTS
What matters to consumers?
What do statistics of employee satisfaction really mean? Most people do not need extensive
complex care. Not all that many people need healthcare which is in fact expensive. The result is
that when those people are frustrated by red tape and managed care obstructionism, it may not
show up as a large number on employee satisfaction surveys. The survey by a leading healthcare
consultant asked employees about where they look for support in making medical decisions. Sixty
two percent trusted the doctor, while only fourteen percent placed their faith in an HMO.
Ask yourself this question: how would you feel if you were the producer of the policy that gave
this woman such awful stress by trying not to treat her breast cancer? Could you look at yourself
in the mirror?
We think of ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act as a federal law which
prevents legal action against an HMO. It does provide that the plan cannot be sued. Here
however the Attorney General is trying to enjoin it from engaging in a harmful practice.
There is actually a provision in ERISA which allows health plan customers to sue the health plan
to prevent it from violating its own provisions. ERISA actually imposes a duty on health plans. It
is a fiduciary duty to act solely in the interests of its customers. The lawsuit claims that the
HMOs have violated that standard.
This suit claims inappropriate use of prescription drug “formularies”, and other practices. This
suit charges that the HMOs failed to tell the patients they will be forced to use less effective
medicines because they are cheaper. At the heart of the complaint is the methods used in
reviewing claims and denying proper medications. It is charged that the HMOs employee
physicians routinely denied the claim without a full review. They did not look at the patient’s
medical record, physically examine the patient, or even discuss the case with the attending
physician. They just routinely said “no”. The Attorney General claims that this is the pattern and
this is the practice. It happens every time. These companies have a moral and legal obligation to
put the patient’s needs first, and to be truthful.
The Attorney General produced evidence that the HMOs intended to delay, obstruct, and confuse
the patients. The result is that patients are discouraged from asserting their rights or even seeking
information. Callers are placed on hold for an unreasonable length of time. If they get through to
someone they typically receive information which is contradictory. If the patient submits
documentation, it either gets lost or there is no response.
According to the plan, one insured was entitled to behavioral health services for her daughter.
Until the Attorney General became involved she heard nothing about the 80 claims she submitted.
Connecticut is by far not the only state to bring these legal actions. Health plans are being
repeatedly sued for failing to act of the best interests of their patients. The health plans glibly
deny any wrongdoing, or do not respond.
Hospitals being paid under a health plan may not ask the patient to pay any more than the
deductibles and co-payments of the plan.
In the case of automobile accidents, resulting in automobile liability settlements, hospitals are
trying to go around the law. They balance bill the patient. Typically, the victim of an automobile
accident advises the hospital about that accident when he is admitted. He also advises the hospital
that he is covered by an HMO. The HMO pays what it is supposed to according to the contract.
The hospital then files a lien against the automobile liability settlement. The hospital then
collects from the automobile insurer. It collects the difference between its maximum billing rates,
which are not discounted, and what it received from the HMO. Now the hospital has the money,
and the victim has to fight to get it back. The ethical question for the agent is that he should
advise the client to seek legal help. Then the agent should step aside.
Suppose the patient has $20,000 worth of treatment at full price. The hospital discounts 40
percent to the HMO. The HMO pays 60 percent of $20,000 or $12,000. The hospital files a lien
for the $8,000 against the automobile settlement.
The hospital uses a collection agency to file a claim against the liability settlement. This is wrong
because it is against the law, and because the contract with the health plan says that the hospital
agrees to look only to the health plan for compensation of covered services. One patient was
F. COBRA
COBRA, The Consolidated Budget and Reconciliation Act of 1985 allows a worker whose
employment has been terminated to continue coverage under the employers plan. Where the
employee himself has been terminated, he may continue the coverage for eighteen months. His
spouse and dependent children each have their own individual right to continue the coverage for
three years.
This only applies to insurance through employment. Someone covered by an individual plan has
no COBRA rights under that plan. He cannot continue coverage under COBRA.
In certain cases only the spouse and dependent child has a COBRA right. Those cases are that the
employee becomes entitled to Medicare, there is a divorce or legal separation, or the employee
dies. Notice that in each of those cases they are no longer the spouse or children of a covered
employee. They may continue the coverage for 36 months.
Finally we have the rights of a dependent child who becomes too old to have dependent status.
He or she is eighteen, or 23 if he or she continues to receive an education. That dependent child
may continue COBRA coverage for 36 months.
If the child has a health problem, COBRA is the only choice. He will not get an individual plan.
Connecticut has “CT COBRA” under which the employee can continue coverage for twenty four
The employee would have to actually be covered under employer health plan purchased from a
private insurance company in order to be eligible for COBRA. COBRA is only a right to
continue existing coverage. It is not a right to start coverage. If the employee was not covered,
spouse and children are not covered either. A child no longer covered under the employer health
plan could not get covered, even after a qualifying event.
The downside of COBRA is that the employee must pay the premium himself. That premium
could be anywhere between $400 to $700, or more. This will have to be paid with after tax
money. The employee pays the employer what the employer pays to the plan plus two percent for
administration.
However, health insurance must be in place because any member of the family might suddenly
require expensive health care. The employee might be unable to purchase individual coverage
because of a pre-existing condition of anyone in his family. While federal law forbids group
health coverage from medically underwriting an employee, an applicant for an individual policy
can still be medically underwritten. This means he can be declined.
There is another very important advantage to continuing under COBRA. HIPAA, The Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1997 provides for continuous coverage. If the
recently unemployed worker continues under COBRA, that fact may prove highly necessary in
obtaining coverage under HIPAA as soon as he finds new employment. Not only coverage right
away, but most importantly, coverage even if he has a pre-existing condition. If the worker does
not elect COBRA, that would create a gap in coverage. Coverage under COBRA is Creditable
Coverage under HIPAA.
Another advantage to continuing under COBRA is that he will not have to switch doctors. This is
important even if the worker could be covered under a spouses plan that does not cover the doctor
that recently unemployed worker wishes to continue to see. Of course a gap in coverage could
also be avoided by purchasing an individual plan, if that is available to that individual worker and
affordable. A short-term policy might also serve that purpose.
The coverage the worker receives must be identical to the coverage that he had before the
qualifying event. The employer may not even permit the employee to choose a less expensive
plan, or require him to take a more expensive plan. The coverage must be the same. The
employer may give the employee the option of dropping benefits such as dental or hearing or
vision care, which are not core benefits. It is the basic health plan which can not be changed.
However, suppose the employer had covered the employee under three different health plans.
Suppose one plan covered medical, another hospital, another prescriptions. The employee could
continue or discontinue any one of them.
The qualifying events again are death, termination of employment or reduced hours of
employment, Medicare eligibility. The employer must notify the health plan administrator within
30 days after those qualifying events.
In the case of other qualifying events it is the employee’s responsibility or the family’s
responsibility to notify the health plan administrator. The family must notify the plan
administrator within 60 days after these events: divorce or separation, child’s loss of dependent
status.
To summarize the notification periods: 30 days for events related to doing the job; 60 days for
family related issues.
After the plan administrator is notified, he has 14 days to notify the family about their rights to
elect COBRA. Remember that the IRS is qualifying the health plan so that the employer may
deduct the premium. This gives the IRS power to either disqualify a plan, or impose lesser
penalties. Plan administrator’s have been held personally liable for breach of duty for failing to
notify the family about their rights under COBRA.
Secondly, employers can relieve themselves of the obligation to notify plan administrators that
the employees quit or reduced their work hours. Any producer arranging such a plan for the
employer should take care. First of all, the producer would have to find out if there is such a
provision. This requires reading the plan. It would then be up to the plan administrator to
determine when a qualifying event had occurred. This would require scouring every payroll sheet
to see which employees dropped off or had reduced hours. The producer would have to be certain
that the administrator was willing ready and able to do this.
It would be far better to join the plan within the 60 day eligibility. Then they will be covered
retroactive to the date they became eligible. If on the other hand, the family elect COBRA after
the 60 day eligibility period is over, different rules apply. Medical expenses would only covered
after the election. If the family waits until the eligibility period is over and then elects COBRA,
medical expenses incurred before the family elects COBRA are not covered.
COBRA regulations place minimum time limits on how long the employee can remain covered.
The plan is perfectly free to extend those limits.
Because this plan involves employee benefits, some facets of it are overseen by the Department of
Labor. DOL has jurisdiction over notification of the employees concerning the coverage.
Employers who fail to comply with notification rules can be fined $110 for every day that the
employer is late sending notification after the deadline. The IRS can levy an excise tax against an
employer who does not comply with COBRA regulations.
An employee who was newly hired must be advised about his COBRA rights. Employers and
producers should be careful to be certain that procedures are in place for this. This can easily be
overlooked because the employee may not have to be covered until the end of a probationary
A former employee or family member may be in the middle of the COBRA coverage period when
the employer changes to a new insurance carrier or modifies the plan. Those people must be
given the option to switch plans at that time.
Some health plans give employees the option of converting from a group plan to an individual
policy under COBRA. Such employees must be allowed to choose to convert within 180 days
before their COBRA ends. The agent should advise the employee that switching to individual
coverage means that he’s no longer covered under a group plan. That fact would undermine
protection that he has under HIPAA. Individual coverage is not creditable coverage under
HIPAA. Furthermore, the individual policy will be more expensive.
Every year one American in five moves to a new address. That move may take them out of the
coverage area. They would lose their COBRA benefits. The employer does not have to offer
them a plan in the new area. The employer would not even be able to offer a plan in the new area.
Premiums will go up every year, and the COBRA covered employee or family will have to pay
more. They have to pay the employer what it cost the employer, plus two percent for
bookkeeping. Premium notices must be sent monthly so that the employee pays attention to
premium due dates.
COBRA does not provide for extension of employment related life insurance coverage, just health
coverage.
J. HIPAA:
HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
Employees Can Change Jobs without Losing Health Coverage
The greatest benefit of HIPAA is that an employee who changes jobs can be immediately covered
by the new employer’s health insurance plan regardless of medical problems
Insurance companies do not like to cover pre-existing conditions in newly insured individuals.
The preexisting condition is usually defined as one for which treatment, medical advice or
diagnosis, or care was received six months prior to the enrollment date. It also includes treatment
that was merely recommended in the last six months. It also covers conditions which the insured
was aware of, but never sought treatment. In other words, if the job applicant knew about the
condition in the last six months, it was a preexisting condition. In some states, even a medical
condition the insured did not know about was classified as preexisting.
HIPAA has done away with all that. The new applicant for coverage in employer’s group health
plan can not be denied coverage due to a preexisting condition.
The employee who changes jobs gets only the coverage provided by his new employer’s plan.
HIPAA is not a right to continue the coverage he had under the old employer. He has left that
plan. HIPAA is a right to whatever coverage the new employer has.
Sometimes an example proves a rule. Group health plans cannot consider pregnancy as a
preexisting condition. However, no federal rule requires health plans to provide maternity
coverage in the first place. Of course many states in the Northeast require it. Thus, if a woman
applies to a new health plan that does not have maternity coverage, she will not have maternity
coverage. She is simply covered for the other benefits of the new employer’s plan.
The rules of HIPAA apply to employer group health plans. The plan only has to have two
participants to be covered under HIPAA. This applies also to companies that are self-insured.
States have the option of applying this group rule to groups of one, and some states have. This is
very helpful for the self-employed. There are many situations where states have given the
individual buyer of health insurance rights over and above rights under federal law. The alert and
helpful producer should always be a lookout for these improvements under state law. Many
courses are written to cover federal laws only, because the same course is given in many states.
HIPAA applies to group plans only. It offers no protection to someone who is purchasing
individual coverage.
HIPAA is a great improvement, but not perfect. There is no federal or state law that requires
employers to pay for health insurance or even provide it. The federal government does not
Health coverage can also be canceled if employee or employers fail to pay premium, commit
fraud, violate rules of the health plan, or the employee moves outside of the plans service area.
HIPAA has definitely not eliminated the waiting period of 30 to 90 days before a new employee
will be covered under the company health plan. The waiting periods do not count as a lapse in
coverage.
How does HIPAA provide uninterrupted coverage? Basically, the employee can be denied
coverage for existing medical problems, but only for12 months. Late enrollees can be denied
coverage for existing medical problems for 18 months.
HIPAA requires the new health plan to give credit for the time the employee was covered under
the previous plan. If the employee was covered for 12 months under the previous plan, he cannot
be denied coverage at all. Why? Because for every month the employee was covered under the
previous plan, one month is subtracted from the 12 months waiting period for preexisting
conditions. With 12 months coverage, he cannot be denied at all. All his conditions are covered
immediately.
The coverage the employee needs is called “creditable coverage”. It includes group health plans
whether under a private employer, government or church. Individual coverage is also creditable.
A departing employee receives a certificate of creditable coverage. This is proof of coverage
because it contains the coverage dates, the policy ID number and the name of the insurer and all
covered family members. This entitles him to coverage under the new plan regardless of
preexisting conditions if he has no lapse of 63 days or more. When he leaves his old employer, he
may avoid lapses in coverage by using COBRA, or buying an individual policy, or short-term
insurance. Unemployment of several months, combined with a failure to obtain those coverages
will result in waiting periods when he finds new employment. Clients should be counseled to
maintain coverage.
Reminds the employees that in order to get HIPAA benefits he must have a certificate of
creditable coverage to show the new employer!
Insurance companies are allowed to examine creditable coverage closely. They can look
at five specific benefits. These include pharmaceuticals, vision, dental, mental health,
and substance abuse. If the insured did not have any of those, the new insurer can apply
preexisting condition exclusions to the coverage he did not have. If the insured had no
vision coverage under the old plan, the new insurer could insist on a 12 months waiting
period for vision problems. If he had only six months of creditable dental coverage under
the old plan, the new insurer could insist on a six-month waiting period for preexisting
dental problems. These waiting periods would not apply to the entire health plan, only
those benefits for which there was not 12 months creditable coverage.
K. EXCEPTED BENEFITS.
HIPAA Is Health Coverage Only
HIPAA is only intended to provide portability of accident and health coverage. HIPAA
does not apply to accidental death and dismemberment insurance, travel accident
insurance, accidental death and dismemberment insurance, or disability insurance. Nor
does it cover liability insurance or any supplemental liability insurance. Also not covered
is workers compensation. HIPAA does not cover automobile medical payments, or any
type of credit insurance. Also not covered are the onsite medical clinics that many
employers maintain.
Administrative savings and bargaining power combine, especially when employer’s band
together to form purchasing pools.
Larger employers have formed NCHB, the National Business Coalition on Health.
Smaller businesses are represented by the NFIB, the National Federation of Independent
Business. Many of these smaller businesses find it difficult to arrange any affordable
health plan whatsoever. As a member of this group, they can find coverage.
Larger employers have flexibility because they have the power to negotiate the terms of
the coverage. Small employers have to accept policies as they are written. Smaller
business focuses on cost because they realize that the state has regulated much of the
market. Larger businesses are able to negotiate the quality of care that they offer to their
employees. Larger businesses undertake healthcare quality improvement initiatives.
They use collective bargaining power to demand information from hospitals and care
providers. This puts the large employer in a position to measure the quality of care that is
offered. The small employer can not do this. The larger employer has staff that can do
this; the smaller employer does not.
Many employers will only become involved with an accredited health plan. Accreditation
is necessary but not foolproof. A smaller plan may do an excellent job for the covered
people, but may not have the resources to provide all the necessary data for accreditation.
Larger organizations can provide overwhelming data with highly sophisticated computer
tracking systems. That does not necessarily mean better care. For example, JCAHO’s
current system allows hospitals to choose among 2500 different measures to track
performance. Supercomputers can work their way through the different measurements to
produce a measurement that gives them a higher ranking. In smaller organizations
computers would not be able to do this. The agent representing a smaller plan is going to
have to provide references from other employers and anecdotal evidence of good care.
The smaller plan may meet the standards, but not have the computing capability to prove
it.