• 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 we’re all out of bubblegum.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

Trump makes a mockery of the legal system and cowardly judges just sit back and let him.

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

“That’s what the insurrection act is for!”

I was promised a recession.

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

There are a lot more evil idiots than evil geniuses.

It’s the corruption, stupid.

Optimism opens the door to great things.

Balloon Juice, where there is always someone who will say you’re doing it wrong.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

One of our two political parties is a cult whose leader admires Vladimir Putin.

Just because you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.

You come for women, you’re gonna get your ass kicked.

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

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

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

It’s not hopeless, and we’re not helpless.

The revolution will be supervised.

Compromise? There is no middle ground between a firefighter and an arsonist.

The party of Reagan has become the party of Putin.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

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 / Risk adjustment and spreads

Risk adjustment and spreads

by David Anderson|  December 28, 201610:24 am| 4 Comments

This post is in: Anderson On Health Insurance

FacebookTweetEmail

Let’s talk risk adjustment and the problem with averages. The picture below is two hypothetical diseases with twenty patients where the average cost to treat is $1,000 per year for each condition. However the spread in the cost varies. Condition A is tightly clustered while Condition B has a very large spread between the low cost members and the very high cost members. What does this mean for risk adjustment and cherry picking?

risk-adjustment

These two diseases have the same average incremental cost to treat ($1,000) but applying similar risk adjustment to these diseases will produce very different insurer behaviors.

Let’s review risk adjustment before we figure out why insurers will respond to the same method depending on the disease profile.  Risk adjustment counteracts the simplest way to make money as an insurer.  Insurers can make a lot of money by charging high rates to low risk people while running far away from high risk people.  That can be okay in insurance systems where we as a society do not care that everyone is covered.  Travel insurance or auto insurance will be good examples of this.  However for health insurance in a world of guarantee issue and community rating with multiple payers which is most government sponsored health insurance market groups (Medicare Advantage, CHIP, Medicaid managed care, Exchange) this is a major issue.

The optimal strategy for any individual insurer in a world without risk adjustment is to collect the average premium without taking on average medical risk.   This logic produced the Gresham law race to the bottom   for AIDS drug benefits where ugly plans drove out attractive plans from the market.

Risk adjustment is the counter to this individually rational but market destroying behavior.  In the simplest form it is an attempt to give more money to the insurers that have higher medical risk.  Ideally, it should move money around in a way that insurers are fundamentally indifferent to the medical risk that they bear so that insurers then compete on their provider costs, networks, benefit design, member services, and disease management capabilities.  Risk adjustment can be bump payments with external funding (Medicare Advantage does this) or inter-insurer revenue neutral transfers where insurers with healthily coded risk pools send money to insurers with sicker than average coded risk pools (Exchange and at least some Medicaid managed care states).

The size of the payments can be either a proportion of average premium times a multiplier or a lump sum transfer.   Medicare Advantage gives a lump sum payment to the insurer for each diagnostic category.  Exchange will take a multiplier of the average premium in a state and use it to calculate the individual insurer’s relative risk.

So now that we covered the basics, how would insurers react to these two disease profiles?  Disease A is tightly clustered.  The spread is a little more than twice the mean and the median is almost the mean.  The most expensive patients are not extreme outliers compared to their peers.  An insurer would love to get all of the low cost members with Disease A and pocket the risk adjustment transfers.  The insurer would profit as the transfer payments are more than the cost of actual treatment while their competitors would be holding the bag on the few above transfer payment cost to treat individuals.  But the amount of money that could be gained by successfully skimming the risk pool is not substantial.

Disease B is a very different profile.  It has the same average cost as Disease A but the distribution is very different.  Eighteen of the twenty individuals have costs that are less than the average costs.  Two individuals have costs substantially above the average ($5,000 and $10,000) so 10% of the pool is driving 75% of the costs.  This is not atypical as health care is a Pareto industry.

A flat bump payment produces very bad incentives.

Insurers would compete vigorously to get the bottom 90% enrolled as these members are profit centers after risk adjustment.  The problem is that every insurer is going to run like hell from the two high cost members.  They are guaranteed money losers.  This means networks will get cut, drugs will be placed on high cost sharing portions of the formulary and every other barrier to enrollment will be set up.  If a carrier in the first year gets a large number of the very high cost individuals within a disease category they will change their offerings to make it ugly in the second year.

This incentive can be beaten if there is two part risk adustment.  The first part would be a bump payment or a base score for relative risk calculation purposes that effectively covers the standard of care for the eighteen low cost individuals.  The second part is a catastrophic reinsurance or bonus score for relative risk calculation that only applies to individuals with certain procedure codes and documentation.  At that point, the incentive to run like hell from the sick and cherry pick the risk adjustment gold mine is minimized at the cost of higher administrative complexity.

Later on this week, we’ll talk about concurrent and adjusted period risk adjustment and the challenges both try to solve.

 

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « “C” is for “Corruption”
Next Post: Secretary of State Kerry’s Speech on Middle East Peace »

Reader Interactions

4Comments

  1. 1.

    Larkspur

    December 28, 2016 at 11:08 am

    I’m not stupid, but I am terribly (maybe willfully) ignorant about this whole huge issue. Just reading this:

    Insurers can make a lot of money by charging high rates to low risk people while running far away from high risk people. That can be okay in insurance systems where we as a society do not care that everyone is covered. Travel insurance or auto insurance will be good examples of this.

    …and trying to concentrate on the rest of your post, I’m already less ignorant. At this point, I don’t know enough to know whether I even disagree with anything you’ve written. But even though New Year’s resolutions are stupid, I am still resolved to read this stuff till I understand it, until I can discuss it with others in a credible, coherent way. It has seemed too big before, and I know my ignorance is essential to perpetuating bad systems, but I am going to be less ignorant from now on. Thanks. Happy New Year, despite all evidence to the contrary. The future hasn’t happened yet.

  2. 2.

    Russ

    December 28, 2016 at 11:11 am

    Would the cost of health insurance be lower if all states were involved?

  3. 3.

    Another Scott

    December 28, 2016 at 11:13 am

    Great post.

    Presumably our near-term future is going to look much more like case B than A, as more expensive diseases and conditions become more routinely treated. Custom-grown organs for transplant, custom drugs for particular diseases, more advanced prosthetics and implants, etc.

    Do traditional medical insurance companies recognize that they’re seeing a train coming at them through the tunnel? Are they like the big oil companies – recognizing that they’re doomed in the long run, but looking to maximize profits in the near term because, hey, it doesn’t matter if the company is a smoking ruin in 30 years if they can become millionaires in 15….?

    How does Kaiser manage to do well enough to have nice ads on TV and seemingly a generally-happy client base? Is the future going to be Kaiser running everything if the PPACA and Medicare is gutted?

    So many questions… :-/

    Thanks.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  4. 4.

    Richard Mayhew

    December 28, 2016 at 12:22 pm

    @Another Scott: Nope, can’t say what A or B is. This is purely a technical description independent of how different diseases have different cost profiles even if the average cost to treat is the same.

    As far as custom medicine — there could be an argument that custom organ transplants would lead to more transplant surgeries but far less complications as the replacement part actually fits into place instead of having to be filed on the factory floor. That is a damn good question that I have no ability to answer and barely an ability to frame the right set of follow-up questions. I think it is a world that I would be more than willing to pay more as we’re getting better value.

    As for traditional insurers, they’ll do fine in a Medicare Advantage world and honestly 10 years is forever much less 30.

    Kaiser uses the combination of good health IT, excellent branding and pretty decent care to do well.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • artem1s on Late Night Weekend Wrap-Up Open Thread: Journamalism, Not A Dependable Profit Center (Apr 16, 2024 @ 1:05am)
  • wjca on Monday Evening Open Thread: Another ‘Rich’ Narcissist, Having A Bad Start to His Week (Apr 16, 2024 @ 12:58am)
  • wjca on Monday Evening Open Thread: Another ‘Rich’ Narcissist, Having A Bad Start to His Week (Apr 16, 2024 @ 12:55am)
  • Quinerly on Monday Evening Open Thread: Another ‘Rich’ Narcissist, Having A Bad Start to His Week (Apr 16, 2024 @ 12:34am)
  • Jay on Monday Evening Open Thread: Another ‘Rich’ Narcissist, Having A Bad Start to His Week (Apr 16, 2024 @ 12:29am)

🎈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!