population risk scores and plan design

19
Population Risk Scores and Plan Design RISE California Summit July 20, 2015 Richard Lieberman Chief Data Scientist (aka “Mad Scientist”)

Upload: mile-high-healthcare-analytics

Post on 15-Feb-2017

115 views

Category:

Healthcare


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

RISE California SummitJuly 20, 2015

Richard Lieberman

Chief Data Scientist (aka “Mad Scientist”)

Page 2: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Today’s Agenda

• I will discuss product design in the

context of:

• Transitional policy

• Small-group vs. individual market demand

• The role of the shared responsibility

payment

• What kind of people enrolled in

Marketplace coverage in 2014

• Where to focus product design efforts

Page 3: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Overarching Theme

• The people who have enrolled in small-

group and individual insurance products

are only a fraction of those who will

ultimately enroll in the years ahead

• It is too early to draw definitive

conclusions about the risk profile of

members

• Product design will need to remain fluid

Page 4: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

We Know the ACA is Increasing Coverage Access

Page 5: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

ACA Creates Winners and Losers

• It is impossible to move from a system where people with

preexisting conditions can be denied health coverage or

charged more to a system where people pay the same

premium regardless of their health without some who have

previously benefited having to pay more

• Some of the winners might perceive themselves as losers

• Prior reforms of the US health care system typically

created only winners

• Medicare beneficiaries are uniformly better off than they

would be without coverage

Page 6: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

What Happens When Politics Drives Public Policy!

Page 7: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Is Transitional Policy a Little Train Wreck?

• The Administration gave states the option of

letting insurers continue individual and small

group plans that would otherwise have been

cancelled in 2014, because they did not comply

with ACA standards, until October 1, 2017

• Thirty-five states are allowing issuers to

continue transitional plans for one or more years

• 21 states are allowing issuers extend these plans

through 2017

Page 8: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Or a Big Train Wreck?

• “Millions of small businesses nationwide — and

an estimated 70% of California's small firms that

offer employee health insurance — haven't yet

faced all the sweeping changes that resulted from

the ACA”

• Colorado has about 190,000 people in transitional

plans- 75,000 with individual coverage and about

115,000 people in small group plans

• There are only 140,327 enrolled in individual market

plans

Sources: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-healthcare-watch-20150413-story.html

and http://www.lifehealthpro.com/2015/03/13/colorado-firm-on-ppaca-compliance

Page 9: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Individual Mandate Penalties Increase Over Time….

Page 10: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Mandate Penalties Are Still A Suggestion!

27-Year Old Individual

Percent of Federal Poverty Level

2015 Plan Year 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

Individual Mandate Penalty $325 $469 $704 $938 $1,173

Lowest Cost Subsidized Bronze Annual

Annual Premium $0 $860 $2,162 $2,162 $2,162

Difference ($325) $391 $1,458 $1,224 $989

Percent of Federal Poverty Level

2016 Plan Year 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

Individual Mandate Penalty $695 $695 $875 $1,167 $1,459

Lowest Cost Subsidized Bronze Annual

Annual Premium $0 $946 $2,378 $2,378 $2,378

Difference ($695) ($1,641) $1,503 $1,211 $919

Source of 2015 Results: “Individual Mandate Penalty May be Too Low to

Attract Middle-Income Individuals to Enroll in Exchanges” Avalere Health,

April 24, 2015 (www.avalere.com)

Page 11: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Even for Older People…Penalties Are Minimal

50-Year Old Individual

Percent of Federal Poverty Level

2015 Plan Year 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

Individual Mandate Penalty $325 $469 $704 $938 $1,173

Lowest Cost Subsidized Bronze Annual

Annual Premium $0 $424 $2,291 $3,407 $3,684

Difference ($325) ($45) $1,587 $2,469 $2,511

Percent of Federal Poverty Level

2016 Plan Year 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

Individual Mandate Penalty $695 $695 $875 $1,167 $1,459

Lowest Cost Subsidized Bronze Annual

Annual Premium $0 $466 $2,520 $3,748 $4,052

Difference ($695) ($1,161) $1,645 $2,581 $2,594

Source of 2015 Results: “Individual Mandate Penalty May be Too Low to

Attract Middle-Income Individuals to Enroll in Exchanges” Avalere Health,

April 24, 2015 (www.avalere.com)

Page 12: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Are Sicker-than-Average People Enrolling?

• Researchers used Express Scripts data to compare

Marketplace enrollees to a control group of members with

employer-sponsored insurance (ESI)

• There were marked differences in age and medication use

between early and later Marketplace enrollees

• Marketplace enrollees had lower overall drug spending and

medication use than did the comparison group

• Out-of-pocket expenses for specialty medicines were 36 percent

higher among Marketplace enrollees

Page 13: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Monthly Prescriptions Filled, By Month Of Enrollment In The

Marketplace And The Employer-Sponsored Comparison

Group, 2014

Julie M. Donohue et al. Health Aff 2015;34:1049-1056

©2015 by Project HOPE - The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.

Page 14: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Odds Ratios Of Any Use Of Specific Therapeutic Categories

Among Marketplace Enrollees Versus The Comparison Group,

January–September 2014

Julie M. Donohue et al. Health Aff 2015;34:1049-1056

©2015 by Project HOPE - The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.

Page 15: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Future Impacts on Product Design

• Most of the “action” has been in the individual and Medicaid

expansion markets

• There are still remain millions of potential new members for issuers to

enroll

• But the real impacts on product design will be in the small group

market– once transitional policy plans non-renew

• With the phase-out of the reinsurance program (50% coinsurance in

2015 and a $90,000 attachment point in 2016), issuers will need to

aggressively manage higher risk members

• It is likely that many of the remaining members eligible for individual

coverage will exhibit lower than average risk

Page 16: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Mile High Healthcare Analytics Can Assist You...

Learn about our new Risk Adjustment Advisory Service:

• Strategic consulting and business process assessments of

risk adjustment operations or quality measurement

operations

• Operational and clinical education around risk adjustment

and quality improvement

• Data analytics and predictive modeling, focusing on

provider behavior and clinical outcomes

• We design, transform, and load data into data warehouses

• Redesign of the HRA process and oversight of the process

Page 17: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

Webinar Series

• Mile High Healthcare Analytics will

continue our free webinar series. We

will continue to present key risk

adjustment and performance

improvement topics to health plans and

provider groups.

• Then, we will meet again on July 22nd to

discuss “Clear Sailing After King: the

Individual and Small-Group Markets?”

Register at: http://www.healthcareanalytics.expert/news-and-events/free-webinar-series/

Page 18: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

CONTACT INFORMATION

Richard Lieberman

[email protected]

720-446-7785 (voice)

www.healthcareanalytics.expert

Page 19: Population Risk Scores and Plan Design

THANK YOU FOR JOINING ME!!

Our website continues to evolve. Please visit us

at:

www.healthcareanalytics.expert