Posted on

PHE (MCOs)- Molina, Elevance Health Medicaid membership grew by over 50% during continuous enrollment

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: Follow the money. Then listen to the chicken littles, who don’t realize they are unwitting mouth pieces of the Titans.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.beckerspayer.com/payer/molina-elevance-health-medicaid-membership-grew-by-over-50-during-continuous-enrollment.html

Molina Healthcare had the largest gains in Medicaid enrollment during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a report from KFF published July 6. 

Elevance Health’s Medicaid membership also grew by over 50 percent during continuous coverage requirements, according to the report. 

More than 1 million people have been disenrolled from state Medicaid programs since April, when states were allowed to begin removing ineligible members for the first time since continuous coverage requirements were put in place in 2020. 

Among five major Medicaid managed care companies — Molina Healthcare, Elevance Health, Centene, UnitedHealthcare and CVS Health — Medicaid enrollment increased by 44.1 percent from 2020 to 2023. 

In investor calls, payer executives have said the companies are working to transition Medicaid members who lose coverage to ACA plans and other forms of coverage. 

Here’s how much five major payers’ Medicaid enrollment increased during the pandemic: 

  1. Molina Healthcare: 62.8 percent increase
  2. Elevance Health: 56.1 percent increase
  3. UnitedHealth: 42.5 percent increase 
  4. Centene: 38 percent increase
  5. CVS Health: 17.1 percent increase 

Subscribe to the following topics: molina healthcareelevance healthunitedhealthcentenecvs health

Posted on

MCOs (ID)- Idaho awards $1.2 billion contract for behavioral health. Both losing bidders sue

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: Shocker.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://idahocapitalsun.com/2023/07/05/idaho-awards-1-2-billion-contract-for-behavioral-health-both-losing-bidders-sue/

New managed care organization to oversee mental health, substance abuse treatment for 425,000 Idahoans

 
 

The new contractor managing the Idaho Behavioral Health Plan won’t take over until March 2024. (Getty Images)

Idaho state agencies are facing two lawsuits after awarding a new, expanded $1.2 billion contract to manage behavioral health services statewide.

The contract, which could change care as soon as next March, controls how more than 425,000 Idahoans — about one in five residents of the state — access behavioral health care. The new organization selected, Magellan Health, will manage care for Idahoans on private health insurance or Medicaid, and those who are uninsured. The new contract includes inpatient care, like hospitalization for mental health issues, while the previous contract only included outpatient care, like visits to a therapist.

A managed care organization is a company that manages health benefits and care for patients.

Need to get in touch?

Have a news tip?

One Idaho analyst sees the new contract structure as promising because it makes one company accountable for the costs of a patient’s entire mental health care. But two companies who lost their bids for the contract argue that the process was flawed, alleging that the state made errors in evaluating proposals.

The state awarded the new contract to Magellan Health, which was recently acquired by Medicaid managed-care giant Centene Corporation. The parent company in February settled to pay California $215 million to settle a drug-pricing scandal, the Ohio Capital Journal reported.

In legal filings released Friday, Magellan argued that the companies suing — Beacon Health and Optum Health — do not have the legal standing to sue, requesting the cases be dismissed. The state, meanwhile, also requested the cases be dismissed, arguing that the court is not legally allowed to review procurement cases. 

Agency spokespeople for the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare and the Idaho Department of Purchasing told the Idaho Capital Sun that they cannot comment on pending litigation, which is a standard practice for Idaho state agencies. Spokespeople for Magellan Health and Centene could not be reached for comment.

Are you an Idaho patient or provider affected by this change?

Reach out to kpfann@idahocapitalsun.com.

What the Idaho lawsuits argue

The new contract has a drastically expanded scope. And the winning provider does not have minimum qualifications to be eligible for the contract, argues Optum Health, which has held a contract with the state to operate the Idaho Behavioral Health Plan for a decade.

In its lawsuit, Optum argues that Magellan failed to meet the contract’s requirement for a managed care organization to be accredited under the National Committee for Quality Assurance. Magellan says it could not become accredited until 2024, Optum claims.

Optum argues in its lawsuit that it earned an “excellent reputation by exceeding review standards, expanding provider access” and claims that it “saved Idaho taxpayers around $400 million compared to projected Medicaid spending.” Previous reporting by the Idaho Statesman found complaints that the company had violated some patients’ privacy.

To evaluate bids, the state scored and ranked each proposal. Magellan’s had the lowest initial cost, Lori Wolff, interim head of the Idaho Division of Purchasing, told the Idaho Capital Sun. But the initial cost estimates only included administrative costs, Wolff added, not benefit costs.

Optum did not make it to the final round, earning the lowest score on its proposal. Beacon and Magellan advanced to the negotiation stage, allowed under a contracting process the state used called invitation to negotiate, which lets someone requesting bids for projects to negotiate with finalists. 

Beacon was originally slated as the contract winner earlier, but it was disqualified after a judge found that the company’s work on a 2019 report on crisis health care needs was related to the contract bid.

Beacon, in its suit, argues that decision “is unsupported by any direct evidence that (the state health department) used Beacon’s prior work to prepare” the bid. 

Beacon, which got the highest technical score, also argues it was unaware that the request for a behavioral health managed care organization drew upon its previous report, which Beacon says was meant to help understand the national behavioral health crisis system, identify needs in Idaho and regionally and recommend ways to address them. The company argues the entire bidding process should be restarted.

Optum says in its lawsuit that it helped 67,739 Idahoans access specialty mental health services last year, including 13,325 who were treated for substance abuse.

The state’s process for obtaining bids on the contract was flawed, Optum attorneys argue, and they also argue that the state should void Magellan’s contract and award a contract to Optum.

“If immediate action is not taken, transition activities could begin that will be costly to the State and Idaho taxpayers,” Optum argues in its suit.

The state applied certain weights to information companies submitted in their bids without disclosing those weights beforehand, Optum says. And after the state chose Beacon and Magellan, not Optum as finalists, it negotiated, which Optum claims is illegal.

“[Errors] deprived Optum of a full and fair opportunity to compete for a public contract,” Optum argues in its lawsuit. “Optum will suffer great and irreparable injury as a result, including this lost opportunity to provide critical services in Idaho and serve the State’s most vulnerable population.”

In addition to arguing that both other companies are ineligible for the contract, Optum argues that only its bid “should have been permitted to advance.” Optum was not considered a finalist for the contract, scoring the lowest on its technical proposal and second on cost proposal.

“We have developed trusted relationships across the state, and Optum Idaho remains committed to providing high quality services to the people we serve,” said Chris Smith, director of strategic communications in Idaho for Optum. “We have significant concerns with the highly irregular and fundamentally flawed procurement process and its effect on those who rely on these vital behavioral health services.”

Improved contract structure for behavioral health in Idaho

The Idaho Behavioral Health Plan provides a framework for how to provide mental health and substance use treatment across the state. The plan has for a decade contracted with Optum Health, one of the organizations that lost the bid and is suing.

The new contract’s structure makes a promising improvement though, said Ryan Langrill, analyst for the Idaho Office of Performance Evaluations. Previously, Idaho’s contract for a managed care provider only included outpatient behavioral health services, putting those who are hospitalized for behavioral health issues under the care of the state.

Langrill said that excluding inpatient care from the contract created an incentive for an organization to not offer the best, and sometimes costliest outpatient care to patients, since allowing them to be admitted as inpatients would relieve the organization of responsibility.

Put another way: Having one provider manage inpatient and outpatient behavioral care meant that that organization had an incentive to make sure the person got the care they needed, instead of shifting them to inpatient, where the state foots the bill and risk.

“Everything we’ve seen, all the research we did about how managed care is supposed to work, was that you want to bundle substitute services together because of the big risks with managed care is the way the state pays managed care organizations on a per member, per month rate,” Langrill said. “And if the managed care organization can deliver services at less (cost), then they get to keep some of the money.”

The state has administered inpatient behavioral health care through its Division of Behavioral Services. But under the new contract, that division will no longer administer inpatient care, according to a new webpage.

Langrill said he didn’t have any proof that Optum was doing that, but a 2016 report by OPE highlighted this gap, recommending the Department of Health and Welfare formally evaluate including inpatient services with its behavioral care managed care contract.

“We didn’t actually see this happening, but the fact that the incentive is there and that gives them a business reason to potentially not provide the best care, that was our problem,” Langrill said.

What’s next

Nothing changes in the short term, until the plan transitions to the new contract. The new contract takes effect June 16, 2023, In the meantime, Magellan is in an “implementation period,” when it prepares to transition to providing behavioral health services, according to Wolff, interim head of the Idaho Division of Purchasing.

Changes will happen sometime in 2024, an IDHW webpage says. Optum’s contract expires Feb. 29, 2024.

The Department of Health and Welfare said more information on the contract change will be shared when a transition date is established. 

Magellan’s new contract has a service date of March 1, 2024, lasting for four years until its end date of Feb. 29, 2028.

All eligible Idaho Medicaid members will receive a letter explaining the new managed care organization, the webpage says. New insurance cards will also be mailed to members on a future date.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Correction: This article was corrected to state that Optum Health’s proposal scored last for technical score and second for cost.

Posted on

MCO NEWS (FL)- State won’t answer Medicaid procurement questions until after July 4 holiday

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: We would like a break from the pain of the procurement process, please.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://floridapolitics.com/archives/621281-state-wont-answer-medicaid-procurement-questions-until-after-july-4-holiday/

 
 

The Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) won’t provide additional insights into its Statewide Medicaid Managed Care program until after July 4.

The state issued an “informational memo” Thursday afternoon with the announcement after a tentative June 27 deadline for it to respond to written questions about its invitation to negotiation (ITN) for the Statewide Medicaid Managed Care program came and went with no action. The brief notice says the agency’s responses to written questions will be included in an addendum to the ITN that won’t be published until “after the July 4 holiday.”

AHCA released the mammoth 956-page ITN in April. Interested parties were required to submit any questions they had about the ITN to the agency by May 3.

The questions, and the names of the entities that submitted them, are public records. Florida Politics first requested the information from AHCA in May, but the agency has not provided the requested information.

Some Medicaid managed care plan executives and lobbyists told Florida Politics in April they were surprised by a provision in the ITN regarding enrolling individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities into the Statewide Medicaid Managed Care program.

 
 

The ITN puts an increased emphasis on the delivery of behavioral health services and, according to the ITN, the agency intends to award contracts to “nationally accredited plans that offer an enhanced delivery system and integration of behavioral and physical health services.”

Florida’s existing managed care contracts expire on Dec. 31, 2024, and the ITN sets an ambitious timeline to ensure new contracts are negotiated, signed and executed by then. To that end, entities interested in participating in the program must submit their bids by noon on Aug. 15. The state anticipates holding a public opening of the bids at 3 p.m. the same day.

AHCA will invite 10 entities to negotiate for the Medicaid managed care contracts. The contracts are worth tens of billions of dollars to the entities that submit winning bids. Managed care plans and other managed provider networks that aren’t chosen to participate in the program are essentially locked out of Florida’s $38 billion Medicaid program until December 2030.

This is the third time the state has put its Statewide Medicaid Managed Care program up for competitive bid. According to the ITN, AHCA has used its past experiences to help inform the managed care networks it’s looking to contract with. But the third procurement does bring with it some changes. The number of Medicaid regions in the new ITN has been cut from 11 to nine and the numerical names for the regions have been replaced with letter names. The changes are a result of operational changes the Legislature agreed to pass in the 2022 Session.

Additionally, AHCA is allowed to award Medicaid managed care contracts on either a statewide or regional basis. For the first two procurements, AHCA was required to award regional contracts, only.

Post Views: 0

Posted on

OP/ED- Despite Rising Costs, Big Health Insurers Should Do Just Fine

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: Every little thing is gonna be allright. Don’t you worry.

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2023/07/03/despite-rising-costs-big-health-insurers-should-do-just-fine/?sh=78428eac309a

 
 

Rising medical costs are hitting health insurer stocks lately but these diversified companies should … [+] be just fine when they report second quarter earnings over the next month.

getty

Rising medical costs are hitting health insurer stocks lately but these diversified companies should be just fine.

Heading into earnings season when companies like UnitedHealth Group, Elevance Health, Cigna, Centene, Humana and CVS Health, the parent of Aetna, report their second quarter profits, some are seeing some not so familiar headwinds: rising medical costs and the loss of customers.

Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, many health insurers reported record profits in part because Americans weren’t using the system as much as before the 2020 lockdowns. When people don’t go to the doctor, a claim isn’t filed with the health plan so the insurance company makes more money.

What’s more, the U.S. public health emergency kept record numbers of people covered by not kicking anyone off Medicaid while Congress and the Biden administration increased and expanded subsidies so more Americans to afford individual Obamacare coverage under the Affordable Care Act.

These trends helped most health insurers achieve record profits. UnitedHealth Group, for example, earned net income of $20.6 billion in 2022 after making $17.3 billion in 2021 and $15.4 billion in 2020. Before the pandemic UnitedHealth made $13.8 billion in 2019. The company, which operates the health insurer UnitedHealthcare and the medical care provider services business Optum, is on pace to make more this year than last. UnitedHealth, which made $5.6 billion in the first quarter of this year, reports second quarter earnings on July 14.

But things are beginning to change now, which some see as a threat to health insurance company bottom lines the insurer’s have been familiar with given the end in May of the U.S. public health emergency that boosted the number of Americans covered when Medicaid redetermination temporarily ended three years ago. Medicaid redetermination, also described as Medicaid renewal or Medicaid recertification, is essentially when people are asked to show they are qualified for such coverage.

Some states are beginning the Medicaid redetermination process as part of the U.S. public health emergency ends, but the process could take several months to a year or longer. The process is expected to impact health insurers like Centene that have a significant business administering Medicaid coverage for states.

DailyDozen

US

Forbes Daily: Get our best stories, exclusive reporting and essential analysis of the day’s news in your inbox every weekday.

By signing up, you accept and agree to our Terms of Service (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions), and Privacy Statement.

You’re all set! Enjoy the Daily!

More Newsletters

You’re all set! Enjoy the Daily!

More Newsletters

But analysts believe health insurers have what it takes to weather the storm of higher costs from increased health system usage and the introduction of more expensive drugs.

“U.S. health insurers have adequate ratings headroom to withstand the mounting cost pressures driven by growing drug shortages, rising pharmaceutical and other input costs as well as higher utilization,” Fitch Ratings said in a report last month. “The structural advantages afforded to health insurers within the broader healthcare system, business model diversification and stable key financial metrics are key drivers supporting credit profiles.”

To be sure, CVS and UnitedHealth, in particular, have been gobbling up providers of medical care, spending billions of dollars to grow their health services and networks of doctors and outpatient care operations. This should increase revenue to these large healthcare conglomerates on the medical care provider side of the business even as expenses rise on the insurance side of the business.

Health insurers also have an advantage of higher rate increases they’ve already requested from their clients, including employers and governments. And some analysts think the federal government’s rate increase for Medicare Advantage plans is enough to help these insurers weather any increase in costs for that growing business.

 
 

“Humana is raising 2023 MLR guidance to the high-end of the range due to elevated utilization,” Mizuho Americas analyst Ann Hynes said last month about Humana’s medical-loss ratio, which measures medical costs of health insurers. “(Humana) is reiterating 2023E adjusted EPS guidance, but the MLR headwind will likely limit upside going forward. Importantly, Humana stated that the elevated utilization was contemplated in 2024 Medicare Advantage bids submitted earlier this month, which should relieve some investor fears.”

Posted on

STATE NEWS (NC) – Officials give update on tailored Medicaid plans

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: Expect another delay.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.northcarolinahealthnews.org/2023/06/27/nc-officials-give-update-on-delayed-rollout-of-tailored-medicaid-plans/

 
 

Jay Ludlam, deputy secretary of Medicaid for N.C. DHHS, speaks at the Hilton Raleigh North Hills hotel on June 14, 2023. Credit: Jaymie Baxley/NC Health News

North Carolina’s Medicaid program “transformed” in the summer of 2021, moving more than a million children, some of their parents and pregnant women off of the long-standing way of paying for every test, visit and hospital stay and moving them into managed care, where private insurance companies receive a set monthly fee for each patient and then set about keeping them healthy.

But some groups of Medicaid beneficiaries remained in the traditional fee-for-service system: people with intellectual or developmental disabilities, people with substance use disorders and traumatic brain injuries, low-income seniors living in nursing homes and many people with severe mental health issues.

During a conference for health care professionals in Raleigh earlier this month, officials from the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services gave an update on the twice-delayed launch of an experimental managed care program for Medicaid enrollees with complex needs.

The program will create specialized health plans tailored to those complex beneficiaries.  The tailored plans are expected to provide “enhanced behavioral health services” that are not available through standard plans, according to the N.C. Medicaid ombudsman’s office

DHHS originally hoped to move eligible enrollees to tailored plans in December, but a lack of buy-in by service providers forced the agency to postpone. The launch was delayed to April before being pushed back again to Oct. 1, the current planned rollout date.

Jay Ludlam, deputy secretary for N.C. Medicaid, addressed the delays during a June 14 symposium organized by the i2i Center for Integrative Health. He said as many as 7,000 beneficiaries would have been forced to find new primary care providers — and in some cases, entirely new health care teams — had the state not extended its timeline. 

“That was really disconcerting to us at the department,” Ludlam said. “Imagine an individual with intellectual developmental disabilities, who has seen the same care team for the whole 10 years of her life, now needing to establish new relationships and assemble a new care team.”

He added: “That felt wrong. That felt like that was not what we were trying to design.”

 
 

Kristen Dubay, left, and Loul Alvarez of DHHS give a presentation on tailored plans for Medicaid enrollees. Credit: Jaymie Baxley/NC Health News

Still, Ludlam acknowledged that DHHS “waited too long” before announcing the most recent delay in February, which “left only about 35 days for members to readjust their plans” ahead of the then-anticipated April launch. 

Enrollees will receive more notice this time around, he said, with the state set to make a “go-or-no-go decision” on the October rollout by mid-July.

Another delay?

About 150,000 people, or 5 percent of the state’s Medicaid participants, are expected to transition to tailored plans. These people also are some of the most expensive patients, who have complicated — often multiple — diagnoses, and who need a lot of support. 

Their care will be coordinated by one of six behavioral health organizations that serve different regions of the state: was

 
 

Map showing the regions served by the different behavioral health organizations. Credit: NC Medicaid

The organizations are meant to act as intermediaries to connect eligible enrollees with health care providers who will be reimbursed through tailored-plan contracts. Some providers have been reluctant to accept this arrangement, making it difficult for the organizations, all of which serve multiple counties, to ensure that eligible beneficiaries have access to care where they live. 

Federal law requires that Medicaid beneficiaries have networks that are adequate to address their needs, but that doesn’t always happen.

Ludlam said a review of statewide data at the beginning of the year found that a large number of tailored-plan enrollees would be forced to “drive 100 miles each way” from their homes to receive care. The situation has improved in recent months, he said, but one major provider has yet to sign on.

“There are continued gaps in contracting,” Ludlam said. “We are seeing that it’s primarily around one system that is not contracting, and I’m not going to mention them by name. We are trying to encourage them to engage in that contracting. I think that that’s really important.”

DHHS declined to say if the launch would be delayed again if the holdout system did not contract with the regional organizations.

“The Department will always push for what is best for the people of North Carolina and will continue to work to improve access and strengthen the services available to them,” the agency said in a statement to NC Health News on June 20. “We are currently evaluating Tailored Plan network readiness and remain focused on providing the best care possible for the nearly 150,000 people that will benefit.”

In February, The News & Observer of Raleigh reported that the organizations were having difficulty contracting with Atrium Health. A spokesperson for the Charlotte-based system told the newspaper that Atrium needed time to “validate the plans are prepared for their responsibilities to fully and adequately serve the needs of their constituents.” 

The spokesperson added that the state, in its first delay of implementing the tailored plans, had “concluded there are numerable challenges in the submission, processing and payment of claims — which has been a historical challenge with these plans,” according to The N&O.

A new model

The stage was set for tailored plans when the state switched Medicaid systems.

North Carolina had for decades paid providers directly for Medicaid-covered services, paying separately for every test, doctor visit and hospital stay. That changed after the state transitioned to a managed care model, which essentially privatized Medicaid by routing payments through a cadre of insurance companies, in 2021.

Ludlam said the changeover — mandated by the General Assembly in 2015 — was driven by Mandy Cohen, the former DHHS secretary who was recently tapped by the Biden administration to serve as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“Secretary Cohen really challenged us to develop a model of whole-person care that focused on buying health,” he said. “Buying health requires that we think about preventative health and emergent health, but also social determinants of health. It requires us to also think about a whole person, and how we integrate those different treatments or different interventions to support the health of members and develop that program.”

While managed care is not unique to North Carolina, the state’s system differs from conventional models by including tailored plans for Medicaid beneficiaries with complex needs. 

At the Raleigh symposium, Shannon Dowler, chief medical officer for N.C. Medicaid, said the model born from Cohen’s vision has “not been done anywhere else in the country.” She believes the state will receive “national attention as the data starts coming in and we see the outcomes and the impact on our members.”

 
 

 
 

 
 

Not everyone is convinced of the effectiveness of the tailored-plan approach. Some health care advocates worry that the plans will create more barriers to care for individuals who already have limited options. 

“The big fear is, will a very, very vulnerable population — people with profound disabilities — lose access to care that they really need?” Doug Sea, an attorney with the Charlotte Center for Legal Advocacy, asked in a September 2022 interview with NC Health News. “The fact is that the General Assembly set this up in a way that directly discriminates against people on the basis of these profound disabilities.”

Barring any further delays, the implementation of tailored plans could coincide with a transformative moment for the state’s Medicaid program. 

 
 

Shannon Dowler, chief medical officer for N.C. Medicaid, speaks during a symposium organized by the i2i Center for Integrative Health. Credit: Jaymie Baxley/NC Health News

Legislation passed in March made North Carolina the 40th state to expand access to Medicaid. The expansion, which will not officially take effect until a state budget is approved, will provide coverage to about 600,000 people who currently lack health insurance. 

At the same time, an estimated 300,000 existing beneficiaries are expected to lose coverage through the unwinding of a federal mandate that prevented states from kicking people off the rolls during the COVID-19 pandemic. DHHS has confirmed that many of these individuals will become eligible for Medicaid again under expansion.

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

Posted on

STATE NEWS- California poised to spend $19 billion on Medicaid and other health care programs

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: CA might be spending a chunk of the health insurance tax on, well, healthcare.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/24/california-strikes-huge-deal-unlocking-billions-for-health-care-00103476

Months of negotiations among the state’s top health care players have ended in a plan to pump billions into Medicaid and struggling hospitals.

 
 

The complex agreement, reported by POLITICO for the first time, resolves a sticking point in budget talks that lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom have been working to resolve by June 30. | Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

 
 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Major players in California’s health care field have reached a deal on how they want the state to spend $19 billion in proceeds of a renewed tax on insurance plans plus the federal funds that go with it — a development that followed months of private negotiations between bitter industry rivals, state lawmakers and the governor’s office.

The complex agreement, reported here for the first time, resolves a sticking point in budget talks that lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom have been working to resolve by June 30. It would impose a tax on health care plans in what those involved described as a once-in-a-generation investment into a system that serves nearly 16 million Californians. It’s a massive victory for the health care industry that came about through an alliance of powerful interests that are often avowed enemies in the statehouse.

The last three times California levied this tax on health plans, it used the money to balance the budget during economic downturns. Now, for the first time, much of the revenue will be spent to improve the state’s publicly subsidized health care system — and in a year when the state faces a $32 billion budget deficit.

Posted on

MCO NEWS (KS)- Blue KC, partners will compete for $3.9B Kansas Medicaid contract

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: After about 2 years of delay drama, the MCO contract political game is starting back up.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2023/06/27/blue-cross-blue-shield-kc-kansas-medicaid-contract.html

 
 

Enlarge

Healthy Blue Kansas, a new entrant to the Kansas health care market, plans to compete for $3.9 billion in KanCare contracts later this year.

Russell Gray | KCBJ

After a multiyear delay, one of the Kansas City area’s biggest insurers is readying to make a run at a giant contract to manage the state of Kansas’ Medicaid program.

First announced in November 2021, Healthy Blue Kansas intends to bid this fall on $3.9 billion contracts that will determine which insurance companies oversee KanCare.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, along with its partners Topeka-based Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas and Anthem Partnership Holding Co. LLC, a subsidiary of St. Louis-based Elevance Health Inc. (NYSE: ELV), hired Bryan Baier as the president of Healthy Blue Kansas in May.

“Bryan is recognized throughout the industry as a trusted leader who brings to Healthy Blue an extensive knowledge of Medicaid and the important role it plays in the lives and well-being of Kansans,” Dr. Greg Sweat, chief health officer at Blue KC, said in a May release. “Under Bryan’s leadership, Healthy Blue will build and expand on our commitment to working with community-based organizations across the state to improve the health of Kansas communities.”

 
 

 
 

Bryan Baier became president of Healthy Blue Kansas in May.

Healthy Blue Kansas

According to the release, Baier has more than 20 years of experience in regulatory, compliance and legislative advocacy with Medicaid managed care organizations (MCOs). Baier and Healthy Blue will be based in Topeka

“By partnering with the KanCare program, care providers and community-based organizations across the state, Healthy Blue is eager for the chance to coordinate the care and critical support services that will enable individuals to live healthy and productive lives,” Baier said in the release.

Aetna, Sunflower Health Plan and United HealthCare are the current contractors for the state’s Medicaid program, which was first privatized under former Gov. Sam Brownback in 2012. KanCare serves 415,000 individuals.

The request for proposals for KanCare are expected to be issued in September, a Elevance Health spokesman said. Once awarded, Gov. Laura Kelly‘s administration indicates that the contracts would take effect Jan. 1, 2025.

Elevance Health, formerly Anthem Inc., has approximately 50 workers living in the Kansas City area. It has more than 100,000 employees across the U.S.

As of June 2022, Blue KC had 1,632 employees — almost all of which worked in the immediate Kansas City area.

According to its website, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas has 1,610 employees. It serves all counties in Kansas except Johnson and Wyandotte, which Blue KC serves.

Posted on

MCOS- Iowa Medicaid contract triggers legal action over alleged conflicts of interest

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: In which an extensively documented set of concerns about the way the state made its MCO award decision is discussed. TL/DR- Lucy, you got some splainin’ to do.

 
 

Clipped from: https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2023/06/13/iowa-medicaid-contract-triggers-legal-action-over-alleged-conflicts-of-interest/

 
 

The state of Iowa is accused of conflicts of interest in hiring a company that soon will begin managing the state’s billion-dollar Medicaid program. (Photo illustration via Canva)

With Iowa’s newest Medicaid managed-care provider set to begin work in less than three weeks, the state is now being accused of conflicts of interest in hiring the company.

A civil petition filed in Polk County District Court alleges Iowa’s newest Medicaid managed-care provider, Molina Healthcare of Iowa, was selected last fall in part because its CEO, Jennifer Vermeer, is Iowa’s former Medicaid director.

Vermeer, the petition claims, “worked closely over time” with those who played a key role in hiring her company to help deliver billions of dollars’ worth of Medicaid-funded health care services to almost 800,000 Iowans.

Molina is expected to begin working in Iowa on July 1.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

The petition was filed recently by CareSource Iowa Co., an Ohio-based nonprofit Medicaid managed-care company that failed to win the Iowa contract.

CareSource now seeks judicial review of the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services’ decision to hire Molina over CareSource, alleging the competitive bidding process used by DHHS produced an “unfair, biased result” that resulted in the hiring of “the only bidder that hired as its CEO a longtime colleague/supervisor” of state workers tasked with evaluating the bidders.

The petition notes that Molina earned 98% of the available points handed out during the evaluation process — a score that “even DHHS’s top witnesses admitted was shockingly high” and which CareSource argues “was no coincidence and demonstrates unfair bias” on the part of DHHS.

In court filings, DHHS has admitted to many of the factual claims made by CareSource, but has denied any bias or wrongdoing.

Bid evaluators allegedly lacked experience 

The hiring process that sparked the petition dates back to May 2021, when DHHS published a notice of its intent to solicit proposals from companies to manage Iowa’s Medicaid program. At the time, DHHS said it planned to select “up to four” companies for the work.

DHHS’s written solicitation for proposals did not disclose the specific evaluation criteria to be used in selecting the winning companies, and instead said only that DHHS would conduct a “comprehensive, fair and impartial evaluation.”

CareSource says it “invested millions of dollars and thousands of hours in learning about Iowa Medicaid’s needs and preparing an extensive and detailed proposal” to submit.

Each of the five members of DHHS’s evaluation committee independently reviewed each of the proposals submitted by five bidders: CareSource, Molina, UCare Iowa, Aetna Health of Iowa, and an incumbent Iowa Medicaid managed-care provider, Amerigroup.

According to CareSource, none of the evaluators compared any features of the proposals to any of the competing proposals, nor did they compare the proposals to the specific evaluation criteria or any other objective scoring methods.

The five evaluators eventually met to engage in scoring the bids through a pro

cess of consensus – although, according to Care Source, “there is no documentation of the reasoning justifying the consensus scores assigned to the various proposals.”

CareSource alleges the evaluation committee was comprised of DHHS staffers who “had spare time to devote to the evaluation process,” but didn’t necessarily have the expertise the job required.

“The disparity of the evaluators’ levels of experience with Medicaid managed care contracts was striking,” CareSource alleges. One evaluator, Jennifer Steenblock, had more than 30 years of experience specifically in Medicaid, but was the only member of Iowa’s Medicaid Leadership Team to assist with the evaluations.

A second evaluator had worked at Iowa Medicaid for only nine months at the time, while a third had no experience with Medicaid managed care oversight and helped run a state-run, long-term care facility that was the focus of a U.S. Department of Justice investigation.The remaining two evaluators had some management experience within DHHS but lacked “substantial experience with Medicaid managed care,” CareSource alleges.

Questions raised about conflicts of interest

While two of the five evaluators allegedly individually contacted the state’s procurement officer to raise concerns about their potential or perceived conflicts of interest due to their close working relationship with Amerigroup, these same evaluators would later testify that they “were told not to worry” about the issue, the petition claims.

Two other evaluators identified potential conflicts of interest on DHHS-supplied disclosure forms but, according to CareSource, there was no follow-up by DHS and the two were never asked if they could set aside any bias or personal opinions they might have.

The most qualified evaluator, Steenblock, had worked closely with Molina’s CEO, Vermeer, when Vermeer served as Iowa’s Medicaid director and when she later consulted for Iowa Medicaid, CareSource alleges in its petition to the court.

CareSource also claims that documents produced by DHHS demonstrate that the department’s “leadership was concerned Amerigroup would pursue litigation if not selected for an managed care organization contract.”

In the end, Molina was the top-scoring bidder, followed by Amerigroup and then CareSource. Rather than award all three of the companies a contract, DHHS Director Kelly Garcia opted to award only two contracts — one for Molina and one for Amerigroup.

Separately, Iowa Total Care has a managed care contract with Iowa that is expected to run through 2025. Together, the three companies are expected to manage the Medicaid program that each year provides $7 billion worth of health care services to 788,000 low-income or disabled Iowans.

According to the petition, Garcia later testified that her decision to hire Molina was based solely on the points awarded by the evaluators. According to CareSource, Garcia was “surprised and concerned by Molina’s extraordinarily high score,” but didn’t go back to the evaluation committee to investigate the basis for the score.

Withheld documents allegedly contradict testimony 

Last September, CareSource filed a formal request to have DHHS reconsider its decision, but the request was denied. CareSource then filed an administrative appeal, sought documents from DHHS and deposed the five evaluators and Garcia.

An administrative law judge held a hearing over several days last November and eventually issued a decision denying CareSource’s appeal.

On March 24, DHHS allegedly advised CareSource that it had discovered in its own offices three binders of procurement-related materials belonging to one of the evaluators, Brandi Archibald, that had not been turned over to CareSource in response to prior requests for such information.

The newly disclosed documents included handwritten notes on the proposals submitted by Molina, Amerigroup, and CareSource and “were squarely covered by CareSource’s September 2022 public records request” to DHHS, the petition alleges. The state agency admits the records “were merely sitting on a shelf in DHHS’s own offices,” according to the petition. The records allegedly contradict testimony by Archibald that she took no notes during her review of the bid proposals.

After the discovery of those records, CareSource asked DHHS to conduct another sweep of its offices to ensure no other relevant materials were missed. In April, DHHS turned over “still more evaluator materials it had failed to produce in response to the public records request,” the petition alleges.

This second batch of newly discovered records include handwritten notes from another evaluator who had testified that he took no notes, as well as extensive, typed notes prepared by Steenblock, the petition alleges.

Molina has been sanctioned by states, feds

CareSource is now asking that a district court judge review DHHS’s decision, reverse that decision, and order the department to either add CareSource as a third winning bidder or begin a new evaluation process, using a “fresh slate of unbiased and properly trained evaluators who are instructed to compare the proposals as required by Iowa law.”

A hearing on the matter is scheduled for Oct. 20. Amerigroup and Molina have each been granted the right to intervene and be heard in the case.

In recent years, Molina has had problems with state and federal regulators.

Last June, the state of California took enforcement action against Molina Healthcare of California and imposed a $1 million fine against the company for its failure to acknowledge and resolve 29,124 provider disputes between September 2017 and September 2018.

Days later, Molina Healthcare and its previously owned subsidiary, Pathways of Massachusetts, agreed to pay $4.6 million for alleged violations of the False Claims Act. Federal officials had alleged that Molina owned and operated a group of mental health centers that improperly submitted claims for reimbursement while failing to properly license and supervise mental health center staff.

In 2019, the Molina of Texas was fined $500,000 by regulators in Texas who alleged the company had been unable to pay beneficiaries’ claims on time. That penalty was imposed one year after the company agreed to settle allegations of late payments by paying a combined total of $7.7 million to the Texas Department of Insurance and various health care providers in the state.

Posted on

RX- 340 B Medicaid MCO Duplicate Discount Confusion and HHS

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: MCOs will have to add a field to the drug claims they manage under proposed CMS rules. The new field will make it easier for manufacturers to not get dinged having to offer discounts on drugs twice.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/hhs-takes-steps-to-resolve-340-b-medicaid-mco-duplicate-discount-confusion

On May 26, 2023, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed an update to the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program (MDRP) rules, which includes provisions aimed at preventing 340B duplicate discounts on claims billed to Medicaid managed care organizations (MCOs). Duplicate discounts arise when both 340B discounts and Medicaid rebates are provided by a manufacturer for the same drug. Although drug manufacturers that participate in Medicaid are required to provide discounts on 340B drugs under the 340B Drug Pricing Program and are also required to provide state Medicaid programs with rebates under the MDRP on drugs dispensed to Medicaid beneficiaries, including Medicaid MCO enrollees, manufacturers are not required to provide both a 340B discount and a Medicaid rebate under the MDRP for the same drug.

IN DEPTH

Because the relevant statutory provisions do not clearly articulate whether the state Medicaid program, the Medicaid MCO or the 340B-participating provider (covered entity) is responsible for ensuring that duplicate discounts do not occur for Medicaid MCO claims, there currently is no uniform system for identifying Medicaid MCO claims for 340B drugs. In the years since Medicaid MCO drugs became eligible for rebates under the MDRP, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has generally encouraged the relevant stakeholders and affected parties to work together to develop a solution. To date, that has not occurred. It appears that HHS may finally be stepping in to develop, or at least work towards, a solution.

Under the proposed rule, CMS would modify the standard Medicaid MCO contract requirements to require Medicaid MCOs that provide coverage of covered outpatient drugs to use unique, Medicaid-specific codes and group numbers on beneficiary insurance cards. The use of these identifiers would assist state Medicaid programs, MCOs and 340B covered entities to identify Medicaid MCO claims that might not otherwise be readily apparent as Medicaid MCO claims. Currently it is not uncommon for Medicaid MCOs to use the same group identifiers as claims for patients with private insurance. If implemented as proposed, the various stakeholders could more efficiently develop additional tools to identify such claims as being for 340B drugs or to exclude such claims for being filled using 340B drugs. CMS indicated that this change would allow the MDRP to run more efficiently, and would be helpful to all parties by ensuring that Medicaid rebates and 340B discounts are being provided appropriately. CMS proposed that this new requirement be implemented into Medicaid MCO contracts no later than the next rating period, following the effective date of the final rule adopting this provision.

While the proposed rule would provide an important tool to assist in the development of additional policies to prevent duplicate discounts on Medicaid MCO claims, it would not itself effectuate a full solution. The proposed rule also does not address the ongoing concern among 340B covered entities that state Medicaid programs or Medicaid MCOs could expand 340B “carve out” requirements or reduce reimbursement rates on 340B drugs dispensed to Medicaid MCO enrollees, thereby removing the opportunity for 340B covered entities to obtain the benefit that Congress intended for them to receive through the 340B Program—i.e., generating revenue from 340B drug sales to enable 340B covered entities to provide and expand services in their communities.

CMS solicited comments on the proposed change by July 25, 2023, and specifically requested comments regarding the implementation timeframe and operational issues that may arise from requiring the inclusion of unique Medicaid identifiers on Medicaid MCO beneficiary identification cards.

Posted on

MCOs (ID) – Idaho looks at farming out Medicaid

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: The Medicaid Managed Care Task Force has one job- make sure the state moves to managed care.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://dnews.com/local/idaho-looks-at-farming-out-medicaid/article_64391e68-9b3e-56e5-b87e-728794eb58f0.html

Task force mulls using third party to administer benefits in hopes of cutting costs

 
 

Julie VanOrden

 
 

FILE – Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra speaks during a meeting with a task force on reproductive health care access in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, April 12, 2023, in Washington.

Evan Vucci

BOISE — The Idaho Legislature’s Medicaid Managed Care Task Force discussed the program’s growing budget, how it could contract with a managed care organization, and challenges faced by the division at its first meeting Monday.

The task force was created to look at how potentially implementing managed care — or contracting with a third party to administer and oversee Medicaid benefits — could reduce costs in the program. The group is required to report its findings by Jan. 31, 2024, with potential policy recommendations.

One of the dominating debates of the 2023 legislative session was the ballooning price tag of Medicaid over the last couple of years; this year’s budget came in at $4.5 billion, which some lawmakers were concerned wouldn’t fully pay some of the bills.

The task force, which met in the state Capitol on Monday morning, is co-chaired by the House and Senate Health and Welfare Committee chairpersons, Rep. John Vander Woude, R–Nampa; and Sen. Julie VanOrden, R-Pingree. Its Senate members are Sens. Mark Harris, R-Soda Springs; Kevin Cook, R-Idaho Falls; Glenneda Zuiderveld, R-Twin Falls; and Senate Minority Leader Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise.

The task force’s House members are Reps. Dori Healey, R-Boise; Jordan Redman, R-Coeur d’Alene; Josh Tanner, R-Eagle; and Rep. Nate Roberts, D-Pocatello.

“I think it’s one of the major projects we’re going to deal with this summer,” Vander Woude said.

One of the ideas that came up repeatedly in discussions over the course of the session involved switching to managed care for more Medicaid patients. Managed care is a system meant to manage cost, utilization and quality of care, according to Medicaid.gov.

MANAGED CARE ORGANIZATIONS

If Idaho’s Division of Medicaid were to move forward with implementing managed care for more of its patients — Medicaid dental care is currently provided through a managed care plan — it would need to seek a contractor to deliver these services.

State Purchasing Manager Chelsea Robilard provided task force members with a detailed explanation of the procurement requirements for finding and contracting with a managed care organization.

Because of the size of the program and its complexity, the process would likely take a long time and the Division of Purchasing would probably need one more full-time employee, she said. Division of Medicaid Administrator Juliet Charron estimated it would take around two years to complete if the Legislature decided to switch from its current system, which is called value-based care and is a reimbursement system that ties payments made to providers to the quality of the care provided and incentivizes efficiency and effectiveness, according to the Department of Health and Welfare website.

MEDICAID BUDGET

Division of Financial Management Administrator Alex Adams provided information about Medicaid’s impact on the state budget, which is significant. Medicaid costs make up the majority of total spending in every state, he said.

This hasn’t always been the case, and nationally and in Idaho, the spending for the program has raised steadily since 2018, driven by more people becoming eligible when states opted into Medicaid expansion and higher costs of services.

Idaho Medicaid is paid primarily through federal funds. In the $4.5 billion fiscal year 2024 appropriation for the program, around $3 million were federal funds. The budget included about $856 million in state general funds and nearly $676 million in dedicated funds.

When looking at all state spending — general, dedicated and federal included — Medicaid makes up 34% of the budget, and public schools, the next largest expenditure, is 24% of spending, Adams said.

Adams highlighted the potential challenges in setting the fiscal year 2025 budget, including that federal pandemic relief funds will wear off and the state will go back to covering a larger share as it traditionally had, and that federal matching percentages are set to decrease because of growth in Idaho’s per capita income. Adams also said the state isn’t likely to end the year with a surplus, as it has the past couple of years, because the property tax legislation passed this session directs most surplus revenue toward property tax relief.

The Medicaid budget also comes with its own unique challenges, Adams said. Because of the nature of the program, if someone is eligible for care and receives it, the state is legally obligated to pay the bill; this makes controlling costs difficult. There are also competing interests between containing costs and providing access to quality care.

“It’s too easy to look at issues only through the lens of the budget and at the expense of patient outcomes,” Adams said.

CHALLENGES IN THE DIVISION

Ryan Langrill from the state Office of Performance Evaluations (OPE) provided an overview of challenges the office found in past evaluations of Idaho’s Medicaid.

Lawmakers have tasked the office with looking into a number of programs within the division, including related to rate setting, delays in claims processing, the Idaho behavioral health plan and its non-emergency transportation.

These reports, all of which are available at legislature.idaho.gov/ope, identified weaknesses within the department such as with contract management. For instance, in regard to the state’s non-emergency medical transportation contract that failed, OPE found that the division made two significant errors: The data that it made available to contractors through the request for proposals process wasn’t complete and didn’t allow them to submit a bid that reasonably reflected the services they would need to provide, and it set a spending cap that wasn’t actuarially sound and wouldn’t cover the cost of providing the services, Langrill said.

The office also has determined over the years the division struggled with benefit management and design, measuring performance adequately, adapting knowledge and skills to new policies or systems, stewardship and a shortage of staff to adequately manage programs.

One of the reports found the department wasn’t asking for enough funding to cover the rates to provide services, Langrill said.

“This led to a lot of frustration from the budget committee, where they were paying for rate increases that the Division of Medicaid told them were necessary for the program, but the rate increases were not actually sufficient to make providers whole,” Langrill said.

Wintrow said, “different ideologies about the program create tensions and budget deficits that they (the department) may not be responsible for, and some of that is on us as a Legislature.”

The office and an outside consultant hired by the state to create Medicaid cost-containment recommendations both noted that the Division of Medicaid has a “lean” staff, which can create issues.

The task force is scheduled to meet again July 10 and it will go over the long-term cost-saving measures recommended in the second report from the consultant, the firm Sellers and Dorsey. The first set of short-term recommendations were presented to lawmakers in February.

The next meetings are slated for July 25, Aug. 9 and Aug. 31.

Guido covers Idaho politics for the Lewiston Tribune, Moscow-Pullman Daily News and Idaho Press of Nampa. She may be contacted at lguido@idahopress.com and can be found on Twitter @EyeOnBoiseGuido.