Jan 27, 2020

Self-insured companies do no better on cost control

Data: Kaiser Family Foundation; Chart: Axios Visuals

Conventional wisdom holds that big, self-insured companies do a better job controlling health care costs than firms that rely entirely on insurance companies to provide their workers’ coverage. But that’s not true.

Why it matters: Although a handful of big self-insured companies get a lot of attention for their cost-control efforts, the data tell a different story: Self-insured and fully insured companies are equally bad at controlling health care costs.

By the numbers: The average family premium for fully insured firms last year was a whopping $20,627.

  • For larger self-insured firms, it was $20,739.
  • There hasn't been a meaningful difference for the past 20 years.

Self-insured firms would seem to have an advantage because they cut out the middleman.

  • Big self-insured firms can contract directly with providers and limit their networks to only cover lower-cost providers.
  • They can implement the latest payment reforms and wellness programs, and even open up their own clinics.
  • And a few very large companies, including Disney, Safeway and Comcast, have received a lot of attention for their efforts.

Yes, but: Most large insured firms have implemented similar strategies. And they buy insurance from the same companies that administer self-insured plans.

  • Big companies also are often spread across the country and the world, which greatly diminishes their bargaining power. No firm or collection of firms has even close to the leverage Medicare and Medicaid have.

The fundamentals have not changed since I started studying corporate cost-control efforts at MIT decades ago.

  • Most firms live by the same unspoken rule: Do what you can to control health costs without angering the workers you need too much.
  • That’s especially true in strong economies with tighter labor markets.

Other dynamics may be at work, too.

  • Benefits officers do everything they can, but CEOs often serve on the boards of the best and most expensive hospitals and socialize with the leading doctors where they live.
  • Taking on the cost problem would mean reducing the incomes and revenues of people who have their ears.

The bottom line: Even large, self-insured companies with all the advantages still have a poor track record on cost control.

Go deeper

Health care prices still rising faster than use of services

Photo: Ricky Carioti/ The Washington Post via Getty Images

Employers, workers and families continued to spend a lot more on health care in 2018, but that wasn't because people used more services, according to the latest annual spending report from the Health Care Cost Institute, which analyzes commercial health insurance claims.

The bottom line: Higher prices remain the main culprit for exploding spending among those with private health insurance.

Go deeperArrowFeb 14, 2020 - Health

Democrats' quiet proposal to cut health care costs

Illustration: Eniola Odetunde/Axios

Yet again, the 2020 Democrats debated last night without devoting much attention to their very interesting ideas for controlling health care costs. But whether they talk about it or not, they've laid out a broad range of ideas for this incredibly pressing issue.

The big picture: Democrats' ideas run the gamut, from taking control over all health care purchasing to plans that would directly regulate a slice of the market, attempting to put pressure on the rest of it.

Go deeperArrowFeb 20, 2020 - Health

Nonprofit hospitals' charity care disparities

Illustration: Lazaro Gamio/Axios

Nonprofit hospitals that did the best financially provided less charity care relative to their income than their less-well-off peers, according to a new study in JAMA.

The big picture: Nonprofit hospitals are required to provide charity care in exchange for their tax-exempt status, but they're increasingly under fire for their aggressive bill collection practices against low-income patients.

Go deeperArrowFeb 18, 2020 - Health