• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

And now I have baud making fun of me. this day can’t get worse.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

“The defense has a certain level of trust in defendant that the government does not.”

Let me file that under fuck it.

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Wake up. Grow up. Get in the fight.

The frogs are rarely mistaken.

DeSantis transforming Florida into 1930s Germany with gators and theme parks.

Republicans in disarray!

The Giant Orange Man Baby is having a bad day.

I did not have this on my fuck 2022 bingo card.

Republicans don’t want a speaker to lead them; they want a hostage.

If West Virginia and San Francisco had a love child.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

🎶 Those boots were made for mockin’ 🎵

Cole is on a roll !

Roe isn’t about choice, it’s about freedom.

Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Anderson On Health Insurance / Revenue neutral risk adjustment

Revenue neutral risk adjustment

by David Anderson|  December 22, 20156:58 am| 3 Comments

This post is in: Anderson On Health Insurance

FacebookTweetEmail

Allison Bell at LifeHealthPro  has a couple of concerns about the risk adjustment process for the Exchanges.  I don’t think they are big concerns:

Privacy concern:

One possible threat is consumer privacy concerns. Consumers may not be thrilled to learn that insurers are assigning them risk scores.

I don’t think this is a strong concern. Every insurer has some means of identifying who is healthy and who is not, and then how unhealthy a person is unlikely to be. There are dozens of vendors that have systems that crawl through claims and other data in an attempt to predict which individuals will have preventable big claims in the future. I have three meetings before Christmas concerning one particular vendor whose analysis is actually better than what their sales people promised.

Any insurer that is involved in any other guaranteed issue offering (CHIP, Medicaid, Medicare Advantage) will also have some type of government risk scoring system because population health will change capitated revenue. Any insurer that is involved in a gain sharing or ACO provider model has some type of risk adjustment. It is a fact of life.

Revenue neutrality means more insurer on insurer fighting:

In the new PPACA HHS-RADV system, all of the payments to insurers have to come from other insurers. Insurers have an incentive to “upcode” their enrollees, but other insurers have an incentive to detect the upcoding, or to leave the individual and small-group market if they feel the risks of having to pay into the risk adjustment program outweigh the potential benefits of being in the individual and small-group markets.

This to me is far more interesting.  Medicare uses a non-revenue neutral model.  An additional diagnosis of diabetes means the insurer gets a payment bump for the incrementally diagnosed individual.   The incentive here is to maximize coding to maximize revenue.

Exchange, and some state Medicaid programs use revenue neutral risk adjustment models.  That model changes insurer incentives towards a red queen race:

The problem is insurance companies that elect not to chase their providers for higher diagnosis coding intensity will see their risk scores look comparatively lower compared to high intensity coding companies, and thus they’ll lose money. So everyone has to do it, or no one has to do it. Right now we are in a stable, socially negative equilibrium of high intensity claim coding for risk score optimization.

Red queen racing is already happening in other revenue neutral risk adjustment programs.  This is not a change in behavior only a change in breadth of a behavior.  I don’t think her concern that insurers will be fighting other insurers is a big deal (besides for popcorn farmers as they’ll get to go on vacation more often).  State and federal risk pool administrators don’t care too much as the money is not coming out of their budgets.  Insurers know the data best.  They’ll know that when they look at the statistics that there is no way in hell Insurer X is covering every single known hemophiliac in the country despite what their risk score is saying about the incidence of very severe hematological conditions.  Instead, they’ll appeal the data and discover that a single provider had been miscoding low level diagnosistic  claims as their biller was flipping codes once every three hundred submissions by a software error.

The insurers are the entities that are closest to the data, so they are the entities that are most likely to be able to call bullshit in real time.  I don’t see this as a bad thing.

 

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Hinge of the Year
Next Post: Baiting the Trump Trap »

Reader Interactions

3Comments

  1. 1.

    MomSense

    December 22, 2015 at 11:17 am

    IIRC you covered in previous posts that a large percentage of us are low utilizers and that a smaller percentage of us are accessing the majority of health care services. Is there some constructive way that insurers and providers could use risk assessments for good? I can imagine offering financial incentives to the providers and patients who embark in a serious smoking cessation or weight loss/exercise program. There are other populations who could benefit from nutritional counseling, stress reduction, etc.

  2. 2.

    Richard Mayhew

    December 22, 2015 at 11:46 am

    @MomSense: Oh definately, risk adjustment can be used for good.

    One recent example at work. That vendor who has a really nice product identified a cluster of kids with young moms who they thought were at high risk of being high utilizers for minimal medical need. We split the sample into two, and sent a social worker and a home nurse to visit one group. The big issue was lack of parenting knowledge. That group of kids over the next six months had slightly higher than average ER visit usage, higher PCP utilization than expected and overall slightly higher than normal costs.

    The non-intervention group had 3x expected ER utilization, half the PCP utilization, half the vaccinations compared to expected, and no overnight hospital admissions at 3x expected costs.

    The same applies to connecting Type 2 diabetics to care managers. Not all Type 2 diabetics need a care manager, some have their diseases well managed but some people need a lot of help. So using a diagnostic based risk scoring system to figure out who is a Type 2 diabetic and then crosswalking that data to the prescription data to see who is filling their prescriptions on a regular basis allows a focus to be made on the people who are not filling their prescriptions.

  3. 3.

    MomSense

    December 22, 2015 at 1:30 pm

    @Richard Mayhew:

    With a little financial incentive to the participants to encourage programs like the one you mentioned, I can see some big improvements in care and cost especially for known risk factors like smoking, obesity, etc.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • WaterGirl on Arizona In The Crosshairs (Apr 17, 2024 @ 2:41pm)
  • WeimarGerman on Distribution of Medical Spending in the US Population (Apr 17, 2024 @ 2:41pm)
  • Geminid on Arizona In The Crosshairs (Apr 17, 2024 @ 2:40pm)
  • Kathleen on Wednesday Morning Open Thread: The GOP Insists There Will Be Blood Impeachment (Apr 17, 2024 @ 2:39pm)
  • Fair Economist on Arizona In The Crosshairs (Apr 17, 2024 @ 2:31pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!