• 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.

Let’s finish the job.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

It’s the corruption, stupid.

Authoritarian republicans are opposed to freedom for the rest of us.

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

I wonder if trump will be tried as an adult.

People are complicated. Love is not.

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

Innocent people don’t delay justice.

Fuck the extremist election deniers. What’s money for if not for keeping them out of office?

rich, arrogant assholes who equate luck with genius

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.

Happy indictment week to all who celebrate!

Come on, media. you have one job. start doing it.

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

Technically true, but collectively nonsense

Imperialist aggressors must be defeated, or the whole world loses.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Take your GOP plan out of the witness protection program.

This really is a full service blog.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Anderson On Health Insurance / Random risk adjustment thoughts

Random risk adjustment thoughts

by David Anderson|  May 3, 20178:14 am| 8 Comments

This post is in: Anderson On Health Insurance

FacebookTweetEmail

I am noodling around on some risk adjustment thoughts. These are not fully formed and I am putting them out here just to get some clarity imposed in the process of writing.

Risk adjustment is needed in guarantee issue, community rated plans. It can minimize the pay-off for cherry picking and risk dodging strategies. Without risk adjustment or some other mean of funding high cost care for sick individuals, no carrier will even think about looking to cover sick people. Instead they will devote incredible amounts of effort to avoid potentially sick people and only cover people who will never file a claim.

I want to play with two different risk adjustment models and shake through some incentive structures. The first is a revenue neutral model where carriers with proportionally lower coded as sick people transfer funds to insurers that have proportionally higher number of people coded as sick. A dollar that Insurer A gains means Insurer B loses a dollar. What are the incentives for the following two states: single carrier in a risk transfer region and multiple carriers in a risk transfer region?

In a revenue neutral system, a single carrier in a risk adjustment region has no incentive to care much about the coding practices of their providers. There is no other carrier that can give the sole carrier revenue or take revenue away. The solo carrier has already priced in the full risk of the population into their premiums. The only incentive for an insurer in this scenario to care about coding is if the coding is so bad it is missing clinically relevant information that could have saved money and improved patient outcomes. This is a weak constraint.

Now if there are multiple carriers in the rating region, the incentive changes. The carriers are locked in a zero sum competition. They are red queen racing. As soon as one carrier engages in aggressive coding maximization, every carrier has a strong incentive to engage in aggressive coding maximization. This behavior can be legal and legitimate. An individual with diabetes and nerve pain in the feet should be coded as diabetic with peripheral neuropathy which is a higher level of risk than just diabetes without complications. An individual with a left arm amputation should have that information in their chart every year. If there is no limit on the amount of revenue that changes hands, the incentive to maximize coded risk score is very strong. If there is a limited amount of premium that can move for risk adjustment, there is a limited incremental gain for risk adjustment optimization.

The other funding model is an externally funded widget payment model. There are two variants. The first is open ended like Medicare Advantage and the other is a fixed sum proportional system. Medicare advantage pays a fixed sum for each diagnosis category found on claims or retrospective chart review. Insurers are not competing for a fixed pot of money. As long as an incremental coder can bring in more incremental revenue than their costs, it makes sense to chase diagnoses very aggressively. Feed back is often given to doctors on how to maximize the coding revenue from a menu of medically similar coding choices. Doctors frequently receive incentives to code aggressively in a risk adjustment revenue optimization direction. There is a difference between aggresssive coding and fraudulent coding but the money and more importantly the direct attribution of money to a particular code does provide an incentive to cross the line between aggressive but medically defensible coding to fraud. Medicare Advantage upcoding drives billions of dollars in incremental costs. Every carrier has a strong incentive to push upcoding as it is free money.

The same logic of revenue neutral multi-insurer behavior applies if there is a capped pool of external money. Every new diagnosis brought in increases the relative risk score of a carrier which means more money for that carrier. This is where red queen racing works in society’s favor as aggressive coding practices will cancel each other out.

One of the side notes that I am fussing with is the impact of Medical Loss Ratio regulations. Current regulation requires Medicare Advantage plans to have an MLR of 85%. The MLR is claims expense plus quality improvement expenses divided by the sum of premium revenue and net risk adjustment revenue. Coding does not drive claims expense. Adding a Z-code to a claim does not increase the reimbursement value of a claim. Adding a Z-code to a claim will increase the risk adjustment revenue. The numerator stays constant while the denominator gets bigger which means the MLR incrementally gets smaller. The 85% MLR places a limit on the value of chasing additional diagnoses. Are we seeing any impact of MLR on risk adjustment revenue optimization behaviors?

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Bury this pipe dream
Next Post: Upton and more policy incoherence in the AHCA »

Reader Interactions

8Comments

  1. 1.

    Daddio7

    May 3, 2017 at 8:37 am

    Let the federal government provide all doctors and hospitals and the whole preexisting conditions and coding charts along with needing hundreds of thousand of insurance clerks just goes away. Doctors get a salary and patients get the treatments they need. Fire fighters put out whatever fire they are called to. They don’t make more money if they pour extra water on a fire. There is no insurance code on how they have to fight a fire. The health department should be run the same as the fire department. We got away from private fire departments 100 years ago, why is healthcare still private?

  2. 2.

    Another Scott

    May 3, 2017 at 8:52 am

    @Daddio7: There are still “private” fire departments (witness the occasional stories about people not paying their “bill” and the FD letting their place burn down).

    It’s all well and good to advocate for single-payer. The problem is, how do we get there given where we are? And do things like elective cosmetic surgery get covered? What if a doctor / surgeon / anesthetist / etc. refuses to join such a system and demands other forms of payment?

    People generally hate and fear change. When you threaten a physician’s $500k/yr take-home practice with the promise of cutting their net pay in half (or more), you will quickly have powerful enemies.

    Plus, there’s the tiny issue that 27-40+% of the population hates the idea of The Government being involved in things like health care. No matter how much we want to believe that most of the country is leftist, it’s not true.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  3. 3.

    rikyrah

    May 3, 2017 at 9:10 am

    Mayhew,

    A question.

    Did the WH authorize the payments for the Obamacare subsidies or not?

  4. 4.

    David Anderson

    May 3, 2017 at 9:13 am

    @rikyrah: I think the CSR subsidies are authorized. My contacts in the insurance industry are crossing their fingers until they see the checks clear on May 22 as that money won’t be booked at some insurers until it actually shows up.

  5. 5.

    David Anderson

    May 3, 2017 at 9:13 am

    @Daddio7: Okay tell me how to get 218-60-1-5

  6. 6.

    rikyrah

    May 3, 2017 at 9:32 am

    @David Anderson:

    My contacts in the insurance industry are crossing their fingers until they see the checks clear on May 22 as that money won’t be booked at some insurers until it actually shows up.

    So, they have an actual date. Ok, I’ll keep the date in the back of my mind.

  7. 7.

    Mark

    May 3, 2017 at 7:37 pm

    New reader, health insurance actuary working on risk score optimization for a non-profit plan, on both MA & ACA side…
    The 85% MLR on MA is so far below our pricing target that there’s no way it would impact RSO efforts. MA plans can run profitably at 90%+ loss ratios, and the risk score lift ain’t going to cover that big a gap.
    If you’re thinking about stuff on the MA risk score game, a fun one to think about is the annual adjustment. That is, CMS jacks down the risk score impact by 0.25% every year, minimum, per the ACA, to account for the MA “upcoding”. As a result, any MA plan that doesn’t aggressively work to improve coding falls behind by that amount every year, which reinforces rather than eliminates upcoding. In other words, as a corrective, that’s a pretty blunt instrument. What could we do instead that removed the incentive to upcode, while retaining the non-cherry-picking positives of tying reimbursement to risk? Follow-up question: current rules are that diagnoses have to be captured in claims every single year to persist, even for situations that are obviously persistent, such as amputation status. This pushes MA plans to push members to see the doctor more often, which is one of the drivers of the higher risk score for MA plans. Would more nuanced measures of morbidity lessen the extent on MA upcoding?
    I don’t have answers, but I think these are interesting questions.

  8. 8.

    EBrown

    May 5, 2017 at 5:20 pm

    In my practice I hardly ever code all diagnoses that a patient has at each visit that I see them — there is no benefit that either I or my academic practice would see (as far as I know). For billing purposes, I make sure that the ICD-10 code covers the level of billing that I need; but I don’t go to any lengths to include other (relevant) ICD-10 codes for what I examined and documented. I’ve never seen an EMR that doesn’t make it too cumbersome to add the correct, relevant codes. For example, as an ophthalmologist, there are 42 different cataract codes, dozens of diabetic eye codes, and dozens of hypertension codes. There is no visible benefit for physicians to code more than a couple for an exam — it takes extra time (and keyboard and mouse clicks) in an already busy clinic. Perhaps a coder will do this but most practices don’t use coders for outpatient clinics.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • cain on Wednesday Evening Open Thread: Enconium (May 31, 2023 @ 10:53pm)
  • Chetan Murthy on War for Ukraine Day 462: The War for Ukraine Finally Begins to Come Home a Bit for the Russians (May 31, 2023 @ 10:53pm)
  • Albatrossity on Wednesday Evening Open Thread: Enconium (May 31, 2023 @ 10:52pm)
  • mrmoshpotato on Sassy (May 31, 2023 @ 10:49pm)
  • Eolirin on Wednesday Evening Open Thread: Enconium (May 31, 2023 @ 10:47pm)

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Seattle Meetup on Sat 5/13 at 5pm!

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

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

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Balloon Juice Posts

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

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

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)

Twitter / Spoutible

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

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

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 © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

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

Email sent!