Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Health Insurance Brokers Prepare Clients For Obamacare Sticker Shock


WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 27:  People participate...
WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 27: People participate in a protest on the second day of oral arguments for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building on March 27, 2012 in Washington, DC. Today is the second of three days the high court has set aside to hear six hours of arguments over the constitutionality President Barack Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (Image credit: Getty Images North America via @daylife
A California insurance broker, who sells health plans to individuals and small businesses, told me that she’s prepping her clients for a sticker shock. Her local carriers are hinting to her that premiums may triple this fall, when the plans unveil how they’ll billet the full brunt of Obamacare’s new regulations and mandates.
 
California is hardly alone. Around the country, insurers are fixing to raise rates by double digits. They’re privately briefing politicians in Washington on what’s in store. Those briefings are leaving a lot of folks up and down Pennsylvania Avenue jumpy.
 
What’s gives? President Obama, after all, said he’d prevent these sorts of prices. His new health law gave state regulators the power to block premium increases. It even created a federal agency to oversee insurance rates. But these bureaucrats are spectators to the price hikes. They’re mere wallflowers. Even in the bluest of states.
 
Their silence is the best evidence of who is culpable for the increases. It’s the policymakers. It’s Obamacare. The President is accepting the premium hikes as an allowable consequence of his healthcare policies.
 
There’s buzz in Washington that to ease the price hikes, the Obama team may slow down some of the most expensive regulations. This might include the law’s mandatory community rating. One approach they’re said to be considering is allowing some of the historically based underwriting to stay in place for a time.
 
But premiums will still rise because, in the end, everything has a price. The law’s prohibition against traditional insurance underwriting is just one of its costly provisions. Washington can try to force health plans to price insurance below the cost of these mandates. But then the health plans will simply lose money and move out of markets. To keep the insurers whole, and accommodate new rules, the cost of insurance must get re-priced higher. That re-pricing is what’s coming this fall.
 
This lesson was learned by Massachusetts, after it adopted its own skinny version of Obamacare. To meet the law’s costs, insurers hiked premiums. Massachusetts’s regulators blocked the increases. All the plans reported losses the very next quarter.
 
This simple economic axiom doesn’t mean the higher premiums were tolerated in Massachusetts, or will be embraced by Washington. What Massachusetts did afterwards is a lesson for where the entire nation is heading under Obamacare.
 
Massachusetts regulators went after the underlying source of spending – peoples’ use of medical services. First and foremost, that meant taking on the providers. Massachusetts moved to regulate the prices that doctors and hospitals could charge and the kind of services that they could offer. Rates are rising nationally because, like Massachusetts, Obamacare guarantees more free medical services while doing nothing to make the market for these things more efficient, or competitive. Like Massachusetts, some form of price controls is the next political chapter.
 
The Obama team can’t merely squeeze the insurers. That’s why our political elite will tolerate many of the looming premium hikes. In the end, health plans are mostly just passing along the costs of the underlying services. That’s even truer today now that Washington is directly regulating insurance company profit margins.
 
To try and get a handle on rising costs, the Obama Administration will start to go after the healthcare providers. The President seemed to hint about all this when he referenced the need to “lower the cost” of healthcare in his inaugural address.
 
Simply cutting payment rates has consequences, or course. It reduces reimbursement without regard to value or need. But indiscriminate cuts to fixed rate schedules for everything from doctor visits to hospital stays are Washington’s standard approach for sanding down Medicare costs. The Affordable Care Act will institutionalize these same political tactics across the rest of the healthcare market.
This is the next iteration of healthcare reform. Call it Obamacare 2.0. Doctors will become the next bogyman in Washington. The target is already being fixed to their hide. As for the rest of us, our health insurance will become increasingly illusory.
 
The prices Washington pays for medical services will gradually fall below the rates where things will be readily supplied. That’s the legacy of Medicaid, and increasingly Medicare as well. Don’t worry, though. The medical services that you’ll have a hard time accessing are mostly the stuff you’ll only need if you get really sick.
 
By Dr. Scott Gottlieb, M.D. via:http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/01/22/health-insurance-brokers-prepare-clients-for-obamacare-sticker-shock/ Dr. Gottlieb is a physician and Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

Dental Discount Plans Beat Dental Insurance... MUST READ!


Everyone wants to sell you dental insurance. But a discount plan is a better bet.


image
 
With drug costs now (mostly) covered by Medicare, dental care is the largest out-of-pocket medical expense for many a retiree. Count on spending some significant bucks if you like the idea of using your own teeth. Whereas a cheap set of dentures costs $395, saving a single diseased molar can run $2,000 ($1,000 for a root canal plus $1,000 for a crown).

Insurers see an opportunity here. Only 30% of old people are now covered by a dental plan, compared with 54% of working age adults and 80% of children. "Aging boomers are accustomed to having coverage," points out Evelyn Ireland, executive director of the National Association of Dental Plans.

With dental insurance plans everywhere now from United HealthCare to Aetna ( AET - news - people ),  Cigna ( CI - news - people ), AARP, etc. its much like a shopping mall frenzy when deciding on a single plan.

Should you buy individual dental insurance? Probably not, unless you need insurance as a spur to get yourself to the dentist for regular checkups and cleanings.

Instead, consider a dental discount plan, if you can find a good one in your area. For about $100 a year you get access to a network of dentists who have agreed to work for the sort of reduced fees they accept when they sign up for an insurance plan's preferred provider network. Cigna says 82% of the dentists in its group dental network also participate in its discount plans and accept the same rate for both. In its Miami plan an exam might be $36 instead of $69; a crown $535 instead of $981.

Discount plans may not be an option if you live in the boondocks. You can find out the story in your state by searching at INeedDentalBenefits.com, maintained by the dental plans' trade association. Searching Florida, we found 19 discount plans serving Miami, including Aetna and Cigna plans offered through Dentalplans.com. The plans cost $80 to $140 a year for a single person. Picking one can be tricky, since each has different providers and discounts. But you can switch plans every year if the discounts don't add up as advertised or your otherwise pricey periodontist switches plans.

The same Florida search found 21 insurance plans for a Miami resident. One problem is that stand-alone dental insurance has a surprisingly low annual limit on benefits--typically $1,200, not counting preventive care. A Miami resident pays $478 a year for AARP's basic plan with a $1,000 cap or $664 for a plan with a $1,350 cap.

Nor is AARP unusual. The average individual dental insurance plan costs $554--and that's for a limited network of providers, meaning full coverage at only certain dentists. The premium will vary depending on where you live but not based on your age. Even using one of the plan's chosen (i.e., cheapie) dentists, you'll have a 20% copay for routine fillings and a 50% copay for crowns and bridges.

Benefit: You typically get free twice-a-year cleanings and exams, and these don't count toward the coverage limit. So what you're doing is prepaying preventive dental expenses and buying a little bit of insurance for other ones. That little bit of insurance, however, comes with annoying gotchas. You may find that some big-dollar items--implants under certain conditions--aren't covered at all. (Read the fine print.) Plus, there are usually waiting periods--as long as 18 months--before you're covered beyond a basic exam, X-rays and extractions.

Still, some financial advisors favor insurance as a way to manage continuing high dental costs. Thomas Rogers, a financial planner in Portland, Me., helped his own mother pick a plan that costs $588 a year, with a $1,500 cap. So far in 2009 she's had $2,056 in dental expenses, with $1,104 paid by insurance. "I realize now that anything at all can happen, even to those who think they have great teeth," says Rogers' mom, Ann Carman, a 71-year-old retired professor of Japanese language and literature.

Another approach to cutting dental bills: a tax deduction. One of Rogers' clients, a 64-year-old retiree in Florida without insurance, was hit by $30,000 in dental bills over four years. She was able to knock $3,000 off her taxes over that period by taking the dental work as a medical-expense deduction.

Note that you can deduct dental and other medical expenses only to the extent that they exceed 7.5% of your adjusted gross income. That means that if you are going to claim a tax break, you want to get all your expensive work done in a calendar year; if you're relying on insurance, you'll want to spread the work out, if possible, to get the maximum covered over several years.

Article via: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/1116/investing-dentist-medicare-dental-discount-plans-beat-insurance.html By: Ashlea Ebeling,

Top 10 Healthcare Planning Considerations For Small Business

 

  1. Structure of your health plan: The traditional structure of health plans are a thing of the past, and in order to remain competitive, businesses must embrace new plan structures and products in the market place (H.S.A plans, cost sharing plans, consumer driven plans)
  2. Understand the penalties of the law and how they will impact your business – Make sure you are complying with all of the provisions of the PPAHCA. Specific provisions to make note of are the individual mandate, essential health benefit package requirement, and employer penalties.
  1. Engage Employees – Employees should be apart of the health insurance process and their feedback should help determine the plans you put in place. If your employees are not interested in participating in a health plan due to cost, use that information to put a plan in place that will align coverage and cost and with the their budgets and goals.
  1. Apply for Available Tax Credits – In the PPAHCA there are many tax credits that are available to small business to help pay for the health plans. Tax credits range from 25% – 50% of health plan costs by 2016.
  1. Make sure you and your employees understand how your plan works – There are a number of different players involved in the health insurance market. Understand what your plan covers, and how it works. Employees should reach out to their carrier’s member services and use them as a resource to make sure that plans and claims are handled correctly. This will be taken into consideration at renewal and can help keep costs down over the long term.
  1. Find a benefits partner – Look for a benefits broker that can help you lay out a long term goal for your employee benefits program. With healthcare costs rising over the long term, make sure you are working with someone who not only has product knowledge but the expertise to place plans that will help with costs down the road. Also, look for partners that not only save on cost, but also administration through multi-product offerings.
  1. Institute Wellness Plans – Studies show that instituting wellness plans not only put employees on the right track towards meting health related goals, and help achieve healthier behavior, but as an added bonus, they build on camaraderie and teamwork in the office. This can lead to increased productivity, healthier employees, and lower health insurance premiums down the road.
  1. Understand the importance of a health plan – Healthcare plans should not only be seen as an expense, but also seen as an important management tool. Health plans should also be geared to increase productivity, minimize absenteeism (which hurts sales) and improve office morale. When employees feel good, they work better, and the less time that they are out of the office due to illness, the more profitable the company will be.
  1. Cost Sharing – Employees need to be able to share in the cost when it comes to health care plans. Seeing as it is their coverage, their health, and your money on the line, cost sharing techniques will reinforce the importance of living healthier and managing the costs. By sharing a portion of the costs, employees will understand the importance of reducing costs and see where their behaviors will affect the overall cost of their health insurance.
  1. Market your plans, Do Not Settle – Do not be afraid of marketing your health insurance plans at renewal with other carriers. Take your time to review the plan and pricing options that are available, and speak with other carriers about that they will do to help you lower your overall healthcare costs. Many businesses do not look at options fearing change, and unsure of what to do.
Article via: http://www.forbes.com/sites/thesba/2012/07/02/top-10-healthcare-planning-considerations-for-small-business/

Health Insurance Application Denied? Here Are 5 Options!

 

options after your health insurance application is rejectedMore than one fifth of people seeking health coverage are denied by insurers, with Montana, Alabama and Arkansas among the states having the respective highest rejection rates, according to a new study.

 
Twenty-two percent of applicants nationwide aren't approved for individual and family health plans, usually because of pre-existing medical conditions, says the HealthPocket report.

"That's clearly the most obvious reason," says Steve Zaleznick, HealthPocket's executive director of consumer strategy and development. "Carriers are certainly taking that into consideration when they are doing their underwriting and determining what they want to take on in terms of risk."

He says that health reform provisions under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that take effect in 2014 will prevent insurers from rejecting applicants with pre-existing health conditions, even those with major physical problems that could incur high hospital costs. But until then, consumers should be aware of what challenges they may face securing coverage in their home states.

"We want to promote consumer research and get people to ask the right questions when seeking health insurance," says Zaleznick. "That's the prime reason for the report."

HealthPocket, a Sunnyvale, Calif.,-based group that analyzes medical insurance firms across the country, based its study on Department of Health & Human Services data for more than 9,400 insurance plans. The report listed several states where insurers frequently decline applicants:
  • Montana, with a 45 percent rejection rate for health coverage
  • Alabama, 40 percent
  • District of Columbia, 37 percent
  • Arkansas, 35 percent
  • Alaska, 34 percent
  • New Mexico, 30 percent
  • North Dakota, 29 percent
  • Oregon, 29 percent
  • Maryland, 29 percent
  • Pennsylvania, 27 percent
  • Delaware, 27 percent
  • West Virginia, 27 percent
The report  doesn't specify why it's harder to gain coverage in these states. But Zaleznick notes that fewer health insurers tend to operate in these states and may be able to impose tighter approval guidelines because they face less competition.

As for the states that don't reject any applicants -- Zaleznick points to New York and Massachusetts as two of the better known -- the reason is simple: they already have laws mandating that insurers provide coverage, regardless of a person's medical issues.

The study also named the individual insurers with the highest rejection rates and in which states:
  • John Alden Life Insurance Company - declining 73 percent of applications in South Dakota
  • Assurant Health - 71 percent in Utah
  • Assurant Health - 58 percent in North Dakota
  • Time Insurance Company - 56 percent in Kentucky
  • Assurant Health - 56 percent in Idaho
But Assurant told USA Today that the figures can be misleading because the insurer often offers rejected applicants an alternative policy that usually includes pre-existing conditions. That coverage, they said, may be more expensive than the coverage they originally applied for.

Steps to take until health reform is law in 2014

Zaleznick advises those with pre-existing conditions to research insurers and to ask questions of their representatives. If an insurer says it can't cover you, then check out the next one. It's frustrating, especially when you're struggling with overwhelming health issues, says Zaleznick, but some insurers are more flexible than others in providing coverage.

But what if you're still rejected? Zaleznick suggests these options:

Try A Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan : US Health Advisors has award-winning status and offers comprehensive plans that bet most major medicals hands down because of the expectional coverage through their Cigna Great West PPO Network and the reimbursement benefits offered to clients. There is no wonder the company has literally grown over a 111% since 2011.

Insurers of last resort: Check your state's designated insurer that's required to provide coverage to everybody. Created under healt reform, pre-existing condition insurance plans (PCIPs) provide federally administered insurance coverage to people who previously have been denied insurance because of a pre-existing condition. But be aware that it could be costly. "The expenses may be high," says Zaleznick, "but if you really need medical care, it could be extremely valuable for right now."

High-risk pools: Currently, there are 35 states that ensure people get health insurance, regardless of their physical condition. The National Association of State Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan provides a list and other information at its website. Again, you may have to pay quite a bit more for coverage.

Government help: Government programs such as Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) offer coverage to some low and moderate-income families. To see what's available and if you qualify, visit GovBenefits.gov.
WebMD, the health website, also had a pair of novel approaches:

Open a business: Some people with pre-existing conditions get group insurance by opening a business and listing themselves as the sole employee. "Using this 'group of one' approach, you have the protections of any group insurance -- and can't get turned down because of a pre-existing condition," says WebMD. But not all states allow this so check with your state department of insurance.

Join a professional group: Some professional organizations, chambers of commerce and unions offer insurance that can be cheaper than regular health insurance. And, in some instances, may be more lenient when approving an application, according to WebMD.

Sunday, February 3, 2013

Birth Control Benefits: The Feds Try Again




 
Federal agencies want to let more nonprofit employers get out of paying for birth control benefits, but the workers would still receive "first dollar" coverage for birth control.

"For-profit, secular employers" could not qualify for an exemption from the birth control benefits mandate.

The agencies -- the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), an arm of the U.S. Treasury Department; the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), an arm of the U.S. Labor Department; and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) -- have described their latest approach to the mandate in a new batch of proposed rules, "Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act" (CMS-9968-P) (RIN 00938-AR42).

"Religious accommodations in related areas of federal law, such as the exemption for religious organizations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, are available to nonprofit religious organizations but not to for-profit secular organizations," officials at the agencies said in the preamble to the proposed regulations. "Accordingly, the departments believe it would be appropriate to define eligible organization to include nonprofit religious organizations, but not to include for-profit secular organizations."

The agencies are simplifying a definition of "religious employer" that was included in an earlier final rule. Originally, a fully exempt employer included houses of worship and religious convocations. Those religious employers had to have the purpose of "inculcating religious values," primarily employ people sharing its tenets, primarily serve people who share its religion, and be a nonprofit employer.

In the latest version, the agencies would change the definition to refer to nonprofit employers that simply meet the IRS definition of a religious employer.

The agencies hope the change will "ensure that an otherwise exempt employer plan is not disqualified because the employer's purposes extend beyond the inculcation of religious values or because the employer serves or hires people of different religious faiths," officials said.

"The departments agree that the exemption should not exclude group health plans of religious entities that would qualify for the exemption but for the fact that, for example, they provide charitable social services to persons of different religious faiths or employ persons of different religious faiths when running a parochial school," officials said.
 
The definition that the agencies are proposing would eliminate the need to ask about an employer's purposes or the religious beliefs of its employees or the people the employer serves, officials said.
The agencies also would define a second category of nonprofit employers -- "eligible organizations," such as schools and hospitals organized under religious auspices. When those employers offer health plans, the insurer or administrator of the plan, not the employer sponsor, would provide and pay for birth control benefits, officials said.
 
The workers in the plans of nonprofit "eligible organization" employers would still get the same kinds of other birth control benefits that workers in most other plans get, officials said.

The agencies developed the draft regulations in an effort to implement preventive services coverage requirements in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA).
 
The draft regulations are set to appear in the Federal Register Wednesday. Comments would be due 60 days after the official publication date.

Preventive services package

PPACA calls for insurers and employer-sponsored plans to cover a basic package of preventive services on a "first dollar" basis -- without imposing deductibles, co-payment requirements, coinsurance requirements, or other cost-sharing requirements on the plan enrollees.

The idea behind the provision, outlined in Section 2713 of the federal Public Health Services Act, is that having insurers pay for every dollar spent on high-value preventive services will reduce overall U.S. expenditures on health care.

A panel at the Institute of Medicine, a government advisory board, recommended that HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius put contraceptive services in the basic preventive services package. Sebelius added a contraceptive coverage mandate to the package in February 2012.

The mandate does not include coverage for surgical abortions, but it does include coverage for birth control pills, birth control devices and the "morning after pill," which can end newly established pregnancies.

Sebelius exempted churches, other houses of worship, and groups of houses of worship from the mandate to pay for the benefits and she also provided a "temporary enforcement safe harbor" that gave other types of nonprofit employers that were not providing contraceptive coverage until August 2013 to comply with the requirement.

Since then, many religious employers, nonprofit employers affiliated with organizations such as the Catholic Church, and for-profit employers owned or controlled by executives who oppose birth control, or certain types of contraception, on moral, ethical or religious grounds have filed suits in federal court in effort to kill the mandate or get their organizations excluded from the scope of the mandate.

Federal courts have refused to hear some cases and delayed action on others because of the judges' desire to see what kind of rules federal agencies might include in the final birth control mandate regulations.

Reactions

The agencies get a few dozen comments on some major draft PPACA implementation regulations and typically get a few hundred or a few thousand comments in response to the more controversial draft regulations.

The agencies are reporting in the preamble to the new draft regulations that they have received about 200,000 comments in response to earlier versions.

Maureen Martin, an analyst at the Heartland Institute, a group that bills itself as promoting libertarian principles, said she believes the new proposal would not be much of a compromise from the perspective of employers opposed to the birth control mandate, because insurers would still provide the benefits for the employees.

"To pay for this coverage, the insurers would get a credit against fees they will owe for offering their policies for sale on federal insurance exchanges," Martin said in a commentary distributed by the Heartland Institute.

Letting the government define what organizations are entitled to a "religious" exemption may violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and inserting a "third party" between a religious employer and an insurer does not seem to give the religious employer a genuine exemption from having to comply with the birth control mandate, Martin said.

Failing to make exemption arrangements for for-profit employers seems to be discriminatory, Martin said.

Friday, February 1, 2013

Aetna AND United HealthCare Will No Longer Guarantee Even A 12 Month Rate Lock Effective 01/15/13... Your Health Insurance Premiums Could Go UP Every MONTH!!---MUST READ

The Most Ominous Sign Yet Health Insurance Premiums Will Explode

 
insurance
(Photo credit: Alan Cleaver)
 
Now comes the most ominous sign yet health insurance premiums are going way up: Most health insurers in the individual market have stopped guaranteeing a person’s premiums for a year. And as one commentator quipped: they aren’t doing it because they expect to be lowering people’s premiums.

Traditionally in the individual market, where people buy their own (i.e., non-group) health coverage, applicants sign a contract and the insurance company guarantees that premium for a year. I’m told that about 12 percent of individual applicants would write a check for the year’s premium, rather than being billed monthly.

No more. Health insurers started sending out notices in January informing insurance brokers and agents that the companies will no longer guarantee that premium rate. From now on it’s month to month.

As one benefits company explained:
“After carefully evaluating its individual market and rates, Aetna decided to discontinue its offer of an initial 12-month rate guarantee.
“This change applies to policies with a January 15, 2013 or later effective date, in all states where plans are sold.
“Existing members who are currently in a rate guarantee period will not be affected. The rate guarantee language has been removed from all marketing materials including the state-specific booklets and rate sheets.”

(Update: the day after this column appeared Aetna published a notice saying in part, “While the policies will not have a 12-month rate guarantee, we fully expect the rates to stay the same until December 31, 2013.” While that announcement may alleviate the concerns of some, Aetna is not the only company ending the rate guarantee... As of today, United HealthCare has choosen the same path. And come 2014 all bets are off.)

Thus, an individual buying health insurance for his family thinking he can afford the coverage might be forced to cancel it within a few months because of premium increases.

Why the change? It is all the uncertainty imposed by the misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or ObamaCare. It has thrown so many unknowns into the mix that actuaries don’t know how much to charge.

As one health insurance broker told me, “Any health insurance actuary would be fired for trying to set a premium for a whole year because no one knows how much it’s going to cost.”

Why the uncertainty? Because Democrats crafting ObamaCare ignored virtually every actuarial principle. ObamaCare requires insurers to accept anyone who applies; they can’t charge more for major medical conditions; and they require insurance to cover lots of things that many people wouldn’t choose for themselves.

As retired actuary Mark Litow and I have written elsewhere, health insurance premiums in the individual market will double for some people in some states—and that’s only in the near term.
Now, contrast health insurance with the life insurance market, where people also buy their own policies. There you can buy a policy with a level premium for five or 10 years or more. Of course, one reason that market is so stable is that President Obama hasn’t tried to fix it.

Moreover, these premium fluctuations will wreak havoc on the government’s efforts to provide subsidies to families with incomes up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level. The subsidies cover a portion of the cost of health insurance, up to a maximum out of pocket for the family. The amount of the subsidy is based both on the cost of coverage and income—which will lead to an IRS heyday of snooping, but that’s a topic for another day.

There has been a lot of head scratching over how to deal with the fact that a family’s income can vary significantly within a year, up or down, in ways no one predicted at the beginning of the year. So how does the government determine the correct level of subsidy?

Now add to that mix that premiums can also vary significantly—though only going up, not down.
And if you think this is all someone else’s problem because you have good employer-based coverage, you may be in for a surprise. While the individual market has been relatively small (about 19 million people, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute) compared to those with employer-based coverage (about 156 million), most honest analysts expect millions of employers to drop coverage and dump their employees into the individual market.

Economic and political uncertainty stifled the economy in Obama’s first four years; but that uncertainty pales when it comes to the uncertainty being experienced in the health insurance market. Millions of Americans will soon discover that health coverage was never so expensive as when Obama decided to make it affordable.

Read More: via Forbes online
Merrill Matthews is a resident scholar at the Institute for Policy Innovation in Dallas, Texas. Follow at http://twitter.com/MerrillMatthews

Things You MUST KNOW About Your Aenta Plan For 2014!!

January 31, 2013
 
Executives at Aetna Inc. (NYSE:AET) and Health Net Inc. (NYSE:HNT) are talking about efforts to use provider networks to cope with change.

Aetna hopes to use networks of providers who agree to take "value-based reimbursement" to drive membership growth in the face of a soft economy and the changes imposed by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), Aetna President Mark Bertolini said today during a conference call his company held to discuss results for the fourth quarter of 2012.

"Aetna continues to be a leader in enabling providers to change their business model from episodic acute care management to population management," Bertolini said.

Jim Woys, the chief operating officer of Health Net, also talked about network management in a discussion of the performance of the California-based company in its Western region.

"Membership in ur commercial tailored network products continues to grow," Woys said, in a statement accompanying the company's earnings release. "We believe these cost-effective products will play a critical role as health care reform is implemented.”

Aetna, networks and 2014

Aetna already has set up 17 "accountable care organization" (ACO) collaboration agreements, has 32 ACO letters of intent in place, and has about 200 other ACO opportunities in the pipeline, Bertolini said.
 
"Obviously, as you can see from our ACO business and our narrow network business, we're getting substantial discounts from the providers with which we're contracting," Bertolini said.

Aetna executives said the company will take a "measured approach" to deciding whether to participate in specific states' PPACA health insurance exchanges, or Web-based insurance supermarkets for individuals and small employers, which are supposed to open for business Oct. 1.
Getting products like the exchange products approved typically takes about three months, but that could slow down as the Oct. 1 exchange startup date nears, Bertolini said.

Although the exchanges might be popular with individuals, it looks as if the only small employers that will jump to the exchanges will be employers that expect to get large subsidies, Bertolini said.
"We do see some potential for small groups to drop coverage" and send employees to the individual exchange programs, Bertolini said.

Even after the exchanges start up, about 20 percent of the individual market will operate outside the exchange system, and Aetna may continue to serve those off-exchange customers in states in which the company is not on the state's exchange, Bertolini said.

Aetna is reporting $190 million in net income for the latest quarter on $9.9 billion in revenue, compared with $373 million in net income on $8.6 billion in revenue for the fourth quarter of 2011.
The company ended the quarter providing or administering health coverage for 18 million people, about as many people as it was covering a year earlier.

Enrollment in commercial medical plans fell 2 percent, to 16 million.

Enrollment in plans that include health savings accounts or health reimbursement arrangements increased 6.8 percent, to 2.6 million.

Aetna expects to see growth this year in enrollment in group plans it runs for self-insured employers, but enrollment in insured group plans likely will fall, Bertolini said.

"We remain committed to our disciplined pricing model and when faced with a choice, we will continue to favor achieving target margins over membership growth," Bertolini said.

Aetna executives noted that a bad flu season increased use of medical services in the fourth quarter but that the effects of Sandy offset the flu spike by depressing use of health care services in some major Aetna markets.

Health Net

Health Net is reporting $5.1 million in net income for the latest quarter on $2.8 billion in revenue, compared with $60 million in net income on $2.8 billion in revenue for the fourth quarter of 2011.
Total civilian health plan enrollment held steady at about 2.6 million.

Enrollment in Health Net's TRICARE plan fell to 2.9 million, from 3 million.

Read More At: http://www.lifehealthpro.com/2013/01/31/aetna-health-net-look-toward-2014?t=individual-health