Jan
19

What’s going on with health coverage for poor kids?

The current clustermess in DC around keeping the government funded is just bizarre.

What’s most bizarre is politicians are holding poor kids hostage, which is the only way to describe what is happening.

Republicans are refusing to consider legislation – requested by the President – to address DACA as part of the budget resolution. This is a core requirement for many Democrats, as is long-term funding for CHIP.

Background – CHIP has long been a bi-partisan program, championed by Sen Orrin Hatch R UT among other staunch conservatives. It provides insurance for poor kids and pregnant women, and has been funded for decades with nary a blip. Till now.  CHIP has been unfunded since October; most states are about to run out of residual funds, which would throw about 8 million poor kids and pregnant women off the program – and leave them with no insurance. 

This makes no sense.  If the Childrens’ Health Insurance Program is re-authorized for a decade, it SAVES $6 billion.  There is NO fiscal reason to NOT re-authorize CHIP, just a political one. The GOP is using the re-authorization in an attempt to force Democrats to support a budget proposal that is anathema to many Democrats – and more than a few Republicans as well.

It appears likely that we’ll be forced into a government shutdown over this, which will end up costing taxpayers a LOT more money than if the party in power had just passed a budget months ago as it was supposed to.  In case you aren’t as nerdy as your author, there have been four separate continuing resolutions to keep the government funding since Trump was inaugurated – and there are NO plans by the Senate Appropriations Committee to discuss a budget for this year – or next for that matter.

Moreover, the Committee, which is dominated by Republicans hasn’t even bothered to hold a vote on a budget over the last year.

If this stuff makes you nuts, well, it should.

What does this mean for you?

Be very thankful you aren’t a poor kid.  And really mad about what this idiots are doing to poor kids. 


Jan
16

WCRI is just around the corner

Had a chance to sit down with WCRI CEO John Ruser a couple weeks ago and get his take on the Institute’s Annual Meeting, scheduled for March 22-23.

For those who have yet to attend WCRI, get yourself there this year…and unlike other conferences, attendance is limited.

I’d strongly encourage you to register now if you haven’t already…

MCM – What’s going to be different about this year’s conference?

JR – We are going to start with a focus on the future – Dr. Erica L. Groshen, former Commissioner of Labor Statistics and head of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics will open with a discussion of the changing workforce and technology’s influence from the perspective of a labor economist, more about what is going to happen.  The theme throughout the conference is we will revisit that.  The Sedgwick Institute’s Dr. Rick Victor (former WCRI CEO) will speak to the challenges facing work comp system including the changes in the workforce, We will close with a panel discussion to hear from different perspectives on this theme.

MCM – Why this focus?

JR – There’s been an acceleration in the rate of change in the workforce, we thought it was time to bring that topic into the conference and bring it to bear on workers’ compensation in particular, it’s time to start considering this in our conference. I anticipate there will be discussion of potential impact of these changes on claim frequency and claim severity.

MCM – Any teasers you can provide on what those trends might look like?

JR – In general, what’s going on in the economy in the labor market is the substitution of capital for labor; capital we used to think of as heavy machines, now it’s software and computers are driving the trend where high risk jobs will go away because of substitution of capital for labor.

Since I’m an optimist and this has been happening for 150 years or so, I believe new jobs will spring up, the question is what does that mean for workers’ comp. Along with that is the change in the employment relationship typified in part by Uber, but its gong to be amore general aspect of the labor market where workers won’t necessarily be attached to employers in the way they were before. That certainly creates challenges for workers’ compensation.

MCM – The implication is that insuring occupationally related injuries and illnesses is going to fundamentally change, is that fair?

JR – It certainly will change.  We’ve seen a quarter-century of declines in OSHA reportables and claiming rates, there is a notion the workforce is changing so there aren’t as many claims as there were in the past.

MCM – There is some indication that wages are heading up in some states, but given the substitution of capital for labor, that means folks in low wage jobs are not going to see increases in pay. For that and other reasons is it likely we will see medical expenses continue to increase as a percentage of claims?

JR – This is the area that Dr Groshen is going to get into…There are other factors as well, new technology that will help workers recover faster or even survive accidents that they wouldn’t have before. With that comes higher medical costs. Advanced prosthetics allow injured workers to function better, and while costs will go down over time, for now those devices are quite expensive.

MCM – Is there going to be discussion about Artificial Intelligence and the role that is going to play?

JR – Yes, that is likely to come up. There are lots of other topics, for example are we ready for value-based care? We are doing work interviewing stakeholders to determine if we are ready for that, and that will be a discussion topic at the conference. We have a session on opioids and the impact of opioids on return to work. The National Safety Council and a large employer will talk about the issue of opioids in the workplace.

Fee schedules, prices, and access to care is always a topic of interest. We will be looking at this, in particular comparing group health to workers’ compensation in several areas including delays in accessing primary care and other types of treatment.

The agenda is here.

2019’s conference will be in Phoenix…


Jan
10

Why your “predictive analytics” program isn’t working

I’m hearing more complaints and concerns about the lack of results from projects involving “big data”, analytics, predictive modeling and the like. These have me scratching my head, as effective use of data is critical to any enterprise these days.

I think I’ve figured out why some of these projects haven’t turned out the way sponsors want.

An excellent article on the effective use of analytics identifies 6 keys to ensuring success hit my inbox a bit ago and I’ve read it seveal times, passed it on to respected colleagues, and gotten their feedback.

Targets and accountability. The Central Analytics Business Unit (ABU) was set up as a centralized profit center with ambitious targets and with direct reporting to the chief operations officer;

Support from the top. Obvious, critical, and bearing repeating.

Incentive scheme alignment. The returns generated by ABU’s analytics projects accrue to the departments, who do not contribute to the cost of the ABU. And the ABU team is paid using variable compensation, based on projects that have been fully implemented and based on their ROI.

Rigorous assessment of results. The contribution of analytics is always measured and in some cases is reviewed by the accounting department.

Communicating with strategic goals in mind.  The ABU emphasized communication

The right people. Recruited employees had:
(1) significant quantitative strength;
(2) negotiating skills and diplomacy;
(3) the ability to communicate with the business lines; and
(4) entrepreneurial instincts. Recruiting this high-demand skill set was not easy.

Most of the initial ABU recruits were external hires, and several of them had little knowledge of the banking industry.

BUT…information without action is nothing but a waste of time and money.

This from a physician executive colleague:

One of the things they don’t discuss that I see as an issue throughout the insurance industry (commercial as well as WC) is that analytics often produce counter-intuitive results, and/or suggest conclusions that are at odds with what passes for traditional wisdom.  

An example – I had 3 years of analytics (pretty good ones, too) that demonstrated a 5 or 6:1 ROI from the medical directors’ department (and that included all costs, fully loaded salaries, etc).  No one would believe it, and they dismantled the whole operation.  So, what I’d add to the HBR piece is that the CEO championing (which is one of their 6) has to include championing of business plans based on the analytics, no matter how uncomfortable that makes some people.  

Think analysis of the true costs of network discount strategies is going to be well received anywhere?

 

 

 


Jan
9

There’s no such thing as “sales”

The word connotes getting someone to buy your stuff, solution, or expertise – but the direction is all wrong. After making many mistakes in the sales process, I’m finally beginning to learn what works and what doesn’t; here’s a few takeaways that may be helpful to you.

This doesn’t work…

Salesman offers

Don’t think of it as selling to someone, rather it is get people to buy from you. A seemingly small semantic change makes all the difference, because the focus shifts from you to them.

People buy because they want or need the service or product.  Sure, a few may buy just because they want you to go away and leave them alone, but they won’t buy again and probably won’t like what you sold them.

They buy because you have something that solves their problem, obvious or not. That problem may be they can’t achieve their objectives using current provider networks, they need to expand into other regions but don’t have the infrastructure, their addressable market is shrinking and they need to find another source of revenue.

How many times have you actually figured out exactly what the buyer’s problem is? Not their employer’s problem, but the buyer’s? Because it’s not unusual to find out what works for the buyer is different from what you think is the best solution for their employer. 

When you approach selling from the buyer’s perspective, it forces a completely different focus. Here’s what I see as keys:

  • Ask questions.  Ask more questions. Then ask even more questions.
  • Until you are ready to close the deal, Do NOT talk about what your company does for more than 15 seconds. No one cares about your history, awards, building, number of employees, or mission.
  • People buy, companies don’t. Figure out what’s important to the buyer(s), and why. Don’t get caught up in the “but this is the best solution to your problem” trap; if the buyer believed that they would be writing the check.
  • Powerpoint (and other types of) presentations are too often a crutch, take way too much time to prepare, and are rarely helpful. Avoid them until you can present a buyer-specific solution.
  • Do not present your solution UNTIL the buyer has helped you design a solution that s/he believes is the best answer.

There’s a lot more to this, but I’ll leave you with this: when the buyer is talking you should be listening really hard, and when you are talking, you should be asking questions.

Be this guy…

 


Jan
8

Monday catch-up

Lots has been happening, here are a few items that caught my attention.

WCRI’s been diving deep into hospital reimbursement. This is an issue I’ve been tracking closely – and I’d suggest you should too. I see hospital/facility costs and utilization as a major cost driver; hear from Carol Telles in a webinar Thursday January 18 at 1 eastern.

As we’ve noted here previously, work comp payers would do well to pay close attention to facility reimbursement and utilization; expect work comp, auto, and other P&C lines to become even more attractive to hospitals seeking revenues and margins.

Healthcare spending inflation actually slowed significantly last yearAn analysis by Kaiser Health News indicates trend in 2016 was 4.3 percent, higher than the overall 2.8 percent inflation rate, but a 1.5 point drop from 2015’s rate.  Notably, drug cost inflation was just above 1 percent (although that’s a lot higher than the double-digit drop we’ve seen in workers’ comp).

Key point – this slowdown in the rate of growth occurred after ACA implementation.  Not surprising that costs went up; we insured millions more people, most of which had pent-up demand for services they couldn’t get or couldn’t afford.

While costs continue to grow, life expectancy declines. We have the most expensive healthcare in the world – by far – yet our life expectancy has dropped two years in a row. As a result, we rank 26th out of 37 developed countries for life expectancy.

Here’s why – we’re paying hundreds of billions for low-value care…

An excellent piece on how to make analytics actually work from Harvard Business Review.  Key points:

  • attach an ROI to the analytics unit itself
  • hire experts from OUTSIDE your industry…

Enjoy your week.


Jan
3

The greatest health “system” in the world

Is responsible for a two-year decline in life expectancy.

Make no mistake, the profit motive embedded in the US healthcare system is directly responsible for an unprecedented drop in life expectancy; opioid manufacturers’ and distributors’ focus on profits coupled with lax governmental oversight led to the opioid disaster.

So, 42,000 of your kids, neighbors, friends, relatives, co-workers died from opioids last year.

But fear not, the addiction treatment industry is riding to the rescue.  Funded by your insurance premiums and tax dollars, a plethora of “treatment” centers are popping up.  While some are excellent, many are nothing more than “treatment mills”, operations set up to suck as many dollars as possible from patients, taxpayers and insurers. Once the dollars run out, the patients are kicked to the curb.

Here’s one example…

The schemes are many, with treatment mills paying body brokers to recruit addicts, false addresses to ensure insurance coverage, fake credentials for “clinicians” and huge bills for non-existent services.

The next time some uninformed individual starts babbling about the exceptionalism of the American healthcare “system”, stick this under his/her nose – we’re exceptional at creating addicts, killing people, lowering life expectancy, crushing souls, while making huge profits for investors legitimate and not.

What’s the solution? 

We pay more for healthcare than anyone else in the world, dollars that are diverted from education, job creation, infrastructure. Many of these dollars are well spent, but the opioid treadmill is just one example of waste and fraud.

A good start would be to much more aggressively prosecute the opioid shills and their buddies in the “treatment” business.  Long and hard jail time for the executives and investors would help prevent the next disaster, but the $209 million in lobbying dollars spent last year by the pharma and device industry makes that unlikely at best.

You get the government you deserve, and you deserve to get it good and hard. HL Mencken.

 

 


Jan
2

We haven’t seen anything yet.

Healthcare is changing really quickly and quite dramatically. Stuff we never would have thought of is happening every day.

  • A huge PBM is buying one of the largest health insurers in the world.
  • Provider consolidation is rapidly accelerating.
  • Many insurers are vertically integrating; they own thousands of providers, care-delivery locations, and are racing to build even more infrastructure.
  • Private insurers are pushing hard and fast into the Medicaid and Medicare markets.
  • Pharma is making gazillions in profits and driving medical costs higher: many employers are beginning to rebel.
  • The world is finally taking opioids seriously, while many fraudulent and sleazy people and companies are looking to profit from the crisis.
  • Medicare and Medicaid are facing major changes; the Trump Tax Bill is just the beginning of efforts to cut benefits and reimbursement.

The healthcare infrastructure of 2021 will look a lot different than it does today.

A couple things to think about.

  1.  While scale is critically important, the bigger the organization, the harder it is to anticipate and adapt to change. Huge health insurers and healthcare delivery systems must force their people to take risks and innovate – but most of these institutions are led by executives with little tolerance for failure. 
  2. The fee-for-service system is deeply entrenched in our entire industry. Provider practice patterns, sales rep incentive programs, provider marketing strategies, employer healthplan purchasing priorities, hospital financial systems, billing and reimbursement infrastructure, insurer business models all are fundamentally based on fee-for-service. Improving outcomes and reducing costs cannot happen without disrupting the very roots of our healthcare “system”.
  3. Our healthcare system is vastly inefficient – and that is precisely why tens of millions of Americans live off that system. Disrupting that system will cost hundreds of thousands of jobs.

What does this mean for you?

The winners will be those that understand where things are going.

There are two basic strategic options: those with a long-term view must become part of the disruption or short-termers will have to carve out a niche that’s sustainable over the near term.

This is the third option, which most will inadvertently pursue.  Business-as-usual folks will wake up one morning and find out they’re toast.


Dec
12

What we missed while we were in Vegas

The world didn’t stop while we were meeting, learning, and socializing in Las Vegas at NWCDC. Here’s what happened…

Sedgwick is getting bigger – again. The acquisition of Cunningham Lindsey makes Sedgwick the largest TPA in the land, with about 20,000 employees handling various aspects of claims and related functions.

Pharmacy and related topics

California’s work comp formulary goes into effect in 3 weeks.  Make sure you’re ready by hearing from those who know it best – the folks at CWCI. Their webinar is available here (free to CWCI members, $50 for non-members)

An excellent primer on handling opioid treatment issues – specifically effective ways to end opioid treatment – comes from Coventry’s Nikki Wilson, PharmD via WorkCompWire.  It’s simple, clear, and concise.

Sticking with drugs, Adam Fein reminds us “In 2016, U.S. net spending on outpatient prescription drugs was $328.6 billion, up only 1.3% from the 2015 figure.” [emphasis added] In contrast, CompPharma’s latest Survey of Prescription Drug Management in Workers’ Comp shows a drop of 11 percent year over year. 

Employment

Employment is going to change – a lot – over the next decade. A thought-provoking report by McKinsey includes this prediction:

One result – “the share of the workforce that may need to learn new skills and find work in new occupations is much higher: up to one-third of the 2030 workforce in the United States” – with major implications for worker retraining, potential claiming behavior, and re-employment. 

A reminder about the unseen consequences of the gig economy: airport revenues are dropping as passengers increasingly use ride-sharing services instead of paying for parking, renting cars or using cabs. I’ve reduced my use of rental cars; even if Lyft is occasionally more expensive, the hassle reduction factor plus the ability to work in the car to and from the airport are compelling.

A total of $5.8 billion was collected by airports from cab companies, parking, and rental car fees, more than they get from hotels, shops and restaurants combined.

Auto mechanic employment is also going to change – as more people switch to electric cars, there’s going to be a LOT fewer problems for mechanics to fix and even regular maintenance is limited to tires and wiper blades.  We have an electric BMW i3; it has needed zero maintenance other than tires.

Takeaway – the downstream effects of the “gig economy” are far reaching indeed.

 


Dec
11

Uncomfortable truths at NWCDC

Frank Pennachio is one of those people every industry really needs. He’s blunt, outspoken, deeply insightful and completely unafraid to challenge established practices.

Especially when those practices need to be challenged. Thursday at NWCDC, Frank and Denise Algire discussed the ways employers pay for managed care services, and how those are often disconnected entirely from the quality of the care delivered to patients.

Frank’s key question is this; do managed care programs improve care or create revenue for intermediaries?

My take is both. I’d also echo Frank’s view that employers and brokers are just as culpable, if not more so, than claims payers and managed care companies. Employers’ desire for simplistic fee arrangements and unwillingness or inability to dive deeper into fee arrangements force (or allow, depending on your perspective) TPAs to seek revenues elsewhere.

Transparency is what’s missing; contracts between and among TPAs and employers don’t allow employers to see the financial relationships between the TPA and managed care companies and providers and understand the motivations and incentives inherent in those relationships.

 

Fee arrangements are the key to the puzzle. TPAs charge employers a flat per claim fee or a loss conversion factor (losses x X.XX%) to cover the cost of handling claims, and that’s pretty much the only thing the employer looks at or cares about.  Thus, allocated loss adjustment expenses are rarely addressed. What employers should be paying attention to are undisclosed side agreements and Allocated Loss Adjustment Expense bucket, where those fees end up charged to the file.

Frank showed a report from an employer that identified bill review fees of over $500,000 for some 4600 bills.  Of course, this was based on a fee structure using a percentage of savings below billed charges – an arrangement that like vampires just won’t die.  Frank noted that many bill review companies are quite willing to charge a flat per-bill fee that includes networks, medical management, and other “savings”. (I have a somewhat different perspective and believe the price per bill should be considerably higher, but fundamentally agree with Frank)Part of me is stunned that we are still talking about this. This has been a subject of conversation many times over many years, and yet, here we are. And here we’ll stay until and unless employers demand something different – and

 

Albertson’s is one of the few large employers challenging this paradigm. Denise shared Albertsons’ network contracting strategy, and of particular interest were the outcomes measures they use. Albertson’s is quite willing to pay for better outcomes, and is diligent in tying outcomes to providers.

 

So what can you do?

  1. Require full disclosure of all fees and side arrangements among and between your TPA and other parties.
  2. Require reporting of all funds transfers
  3. Realize you are going to have to pay higher per claim fees and/or higher unallocated loss adjustment expenses.
  4. Require documentation and reporting on quality measures for all medical care including networks.
  5. Be willing to pay more for better outcomes.