{"title":"A Financial Analysis of New York City Start-up Health Plans and Reasons for Their Losses.","authors":"Adam E Block","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Using New York City as an example, this research explores reasons for the consistently poor financial performance of three start-up health plans (Health Republic, CareConnect, and Oscar) while other health plans have performed relatively well in the same market.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>This study compiles insurer data from financial years 2014 through 2016, submitted to the New York State Department of Financial Services as part of the rate-review process, including premium revenue, claims cost, risk adjustment, administrative costs, net income, and premium. The financial data were used to create a novel metric, adjusted net income, that evaluates the financial performance of an insurer excluding risk adjustment and assuming a market average administrative cost. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the performance of start-up plans, commercial plans, and Medicaid plans in the ACA exchange market.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Premiums for start-up plans were within 9% of median silver premiums yet adjusted net income was negative (-$190 PMPM) for all three start-ups while it is positive (+$27 PMPM) for the non-start-ups. The difference in adjusted net incomes shows that poor financial performance of start-ups was due to claims costs, not high administrative costs and poor performance in risk adjustment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The consistent financial losses by New York City start-ups is driven by higher-cost provider contracts for the start-ups relative to competitors.</p>","PeriodicalId":39329,"journal":{"name":"Managed Care","volume":"27 12","pages":"34-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Managed Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Using New York City as an example, this research explores reasons for the consistently poor financial performance of three start-up health plans (Health Republic, CareConnect, and Oscar) while other health plans have performed relatively well in the same market.
Design and methods: This study compiles insurer data from financial years 2014 through 2016, submitted to the New York State Department of Financial Services as part of the rate-review process, including premium revenue, claims cost, risk adjustment, administrative costs, net income, and premium. The financial data were used to create a novel metric, adjusted net income, that evaluates the financial performance of an insurer excluding risk adjustment and assuming a market average administrative cost. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the performance of start-up plans, commercial plans, and Medicaid plans in the ACA exchange market.
Results: Premiums for start-up plans were within 9% of median silver premiums yet adjusted net income was negative (-$190 PMPM) for all three start-ups while it is positive (+$27 PMPM) for the non-start-ups. The difference in adjusted net incomes shows that poor financial performance of start-ups was due to claims costs, not high administrative costs and poor performance in risk adjustment.
Conclusion: The consistent financial losses by New York City start-ups is driven by higher-cost provider contracts for the start-ups relative to competitors.