THE TORI GROUP LLC
  • Home
  • Bright Ideas
    • Health Care Reform
    • Corporate Strategy
    • Health and Productivity
    • BrightSide
  • Bright People
  • Bright News
  • Bright Projects
  • Bright Talk

As Health Reform Dives Into Year Two, The Talent Pool Remains Shallow

2/20/2015

1 Comment

 
by Leesa Tori, President and CEO, The Tori Group

With health care reform facing its broadest implementation to date, the struggle to find experienced, available executives with the required specific skill sets continues.

First of all, let’s revisit the startup environment in which HBEX were born. It’s been challenge after challenge since the passage of health care reform. Once the ACA lived through the Supreme Court decision and a contentious election, there was little time to get the job done, let alone recruit the uniquely experienced individuals necessary to make it happen. With the entire nation required to “Go-Live” on the same day, and the states and federal government vying for talent, there simply wasn’t enough to go around. 

In addition, the job description wasn’t exactly enticing to those qualified, private sector professionals who might be in a position to switch jobs: Take a paradigm-changing insurance concept, with a strict, aggressive timetable, a tight budget, and an extremely complex set of moving parts — and implement a sustainable public insurance marketplace.

As Peter Lee, CEO of Covered California, described the task, it was like “building a car while driving 70 miles an hour.”

Add to that scenario decreasing unemployment rates, less than enticing government pay scales, resistance to relocating for many due to under-water mortgages and/or family or two-earner relocation issues, and you have a robust recipe for outsourcing key positions. And let’s not forget (ironically) fear of losing insurance coverage. Remember, at this point there was no guaranteed issue. For more than eight decades, a majority of Americans relied on employer-sponsored coverage, so leaving your job (or your spouse leaving his or her job) could mean leaving your coverage — a scary proposition for many. 

Last October, an Associated Press article questioned whether Covered California had a conflict of interest in retaining contractors (including The Tori Group) via sole source contracts to help launch what became the most successful health insurance exchange in the U.S.

In fact, in the case of The Tori Group, Covered California turned to us because our experience in building and managing health insurance exchanges is virtually unmatched. Furthermore, our credentials and detailed proposal were reviewed and approved through the highest of oversight channels.

In any industry, what CEO faced with launching a new product (especially one under an unprecedented spotlight and with so many naysayers) doesn’t want people who have done it successfully in the past? Hiring experienced people means hiring people you know or who know each other.

If this is conflict of interest, then countless organizations are guilty.

In the case of health care reform, I add that success doesn’t only require experienced people who know the health care business inside/out and can hit the ground running. It also needs people with a mission. True believers in the ACA who are willing to focus ALL their time and talent on creating a successful marketplace. The Tori Group prides itself on being optimistic proponents of the ACA. The law may not be perfect, but it’s a good start.

When building an exchange, having experienced people at the table makes all the difference. Here are some examples:

1.     How do you get multiple plans to adopt a policy for extension of applications in a matter of days?  This type of issue goes beyond writing a policy. You must understand the implications for ALL of the stakeholders involved. Small plans may be nimble and able to more easily make changes in systems and staff policy; however, they often are not as well capitalized and cannot “float” payments to providers while waiting for premiums that may be affected by extension.  Understanding how the policy will affect all players helps create a win-win program from the beginning as well as avoid potential alienation of some or most of your supply chain.

2.     How do you message enrollees about changes when 40% of the business was sold through insurance agents?  Experienced health care leaders will tell you to be sure and message an enrollee’s agent BEFORE you send out communications to the membership. The insurance agent has worked hard to bring you this business and much of their value proposition to the consumer lies in the ability to bring them updates in a timely and proactive manner. Few things will alienate your agent distribution channel faster than getting between them and their clients.

3.     How do you train on CHOICE?  Choice is both a blessing and a curse. It’s not a simple matter of telling customer service representatives there are 11 health plans for consumers to choose from — they just need to pick one. Rather, you have to educate your consumer-facing workers on how to answer questions about all of the choices, from network attributes to billing policies.  And you have to be certain they are getting it right, not just in the training room but in their every interaction with potential customers. A key risk point in the cycle of building a sustainable exchange is ensuring the staff are actually administering the program the way it was meant to be administered. Assuring your participating health plans you have policies in place for proper representation, then later finding out that your team is actually dispensing wrong information can be a quick way to lose the trust of your health plan partners. Without the health plans, you simply do NOT have a product to sell.

In California’s case, did outsourcing so many key positions work? Yes. In it's first open enrollment the California exchange, launched last October, enrolled nearly 3.5 million, including more than 1.2 million in private plans and about two million in Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program. That equates to approximately 42% of the eligible market. No other state exchange came close.

I’m also particularly proud of the work we did and continue to do to help Covered California become self-sufficient without the The Tori Group’s help in manning those key interim positions. We think that developing and mapping detailed governance procedures, operational processes and education support systems for growing talent internally is part of our job as responsible and ethical consultants.

It’s true that, as health exchanges mature, there will be more and more experienced individuals to choose from in the talent pool. But the HBEX marketplace will remain the “wild west” for several more years. In the near future we will see the impact of the first year of claims, the first experience with consumer reaction to premium increases and changing health plan choices, the first mandated full portfolio review, the first year of SHOP launches for many exchanges, and more.

Only with time will the skilled talent pool grow. Only in time will exchanges be able to rely fully on FTEs to continue the mission of health care reform. Meanwhile, HBEX leadership must be very conscious of potential hiring practice pitfalls as they move to make this happen. In addition to the obvious — competitive salaries — you must avoid too narrow a focus in job descriptions and lengthy and complex application processes. There is no dearth of testimony that these sins have forced many a great candidate to accept another offer. Antiquated recruiting technology, too, can fail to attract many young hopefuls that could become important assets to the cause.

And finally, if your organization is faced with severe growing pains, don’t let the spectre of any type of conflict of interest inhibit you from relying on tested and trusted outsources as interim solutions.

 

1 Comment

How A Trip To The Market Got Me Thinking About Health Exchanges

2/12/2015

1 Comment

 
By David Greene, Senior Principal, The Tori Group

I'll admit that I'm not the one in the house who is usually in charge of household groceries.  But, upon being asked, I had no hesitancy in helping out and doing so - just text me the shopping list and I'm off.  However, once in the market, my efforts were squarely stalled once starring down the endless aisle containing cereals.  Seemingly thousands of options, most of which seem just a millimeter apart in content and targeted buyer.  The boxes look identical but one is multigrain, honey coated, vitamin C & D enriched, low sodium, flakes; and the other is multigrain, honey coated, vitamin C & D enriched, low sodium, flakes with crunch.  Imagine the household disaster if the wrong one were placed in the cart?!

Having a bit of marketing geek in me, a chunk of time is then spent studying how the makers of cereal appear to be fighting for shelf space, how closely aligned differentiation is around a central concept of taste, such as wheat flakes with raisins or just plain wheat flakes, kids cereals located lower to appeal to children and healthier cereals up higher for the adult eye... you get the idea.  Considered too was a bit of recent research that found if the box has a person/character that looks you in the eye, you are more likely to buy it.  But the bottom line was the multitude of it all is paralyzing to a consumer wanting to make a choice.  I know I was stopped in my tracks... so I had to call home for "tech support" to make sure the right box was put in the cart. 

Exchanges are like Cereal Aisles

·       In Florida:  One carrier has 18 plans over four metal tiers.  In some cases, the premium for a platinum plan is less than a silver tier plan they offer (figure that one out).

·       In Texas:  One carrier has 17 plans, there are gold plans costing less than silver, and evidently someone got tired after working the bronze through gold tiers because no platinum offerings are made. 

·       In New York:  There are 10 plan offerings per web page... and 71 pages available to scroll through.  If you narrow your search to silver tier only (generally the most popular tier selected), the choice is narrowed to 19 pages to scroll through.  More, many carriers are offering eight or more plans on one tier... one carrier had up to four pages to scroll through on a single tier! 

The choice is overwhelming. 

Examples could have easily been derived from other states as well.  Please know the above states are not being "picked on".  The offerings cited above are within the rules established - that's understood (I'll come back to this comment in a bit).  The point is how much do we really expect for a consumer to deal with and still feel confident in their choice?  This question becomes more emphatic when the selection is about who will be entrusted with one's health (most likely when they in the middle of a health scare and need the trust most). 

Déjà Vu

Déjà Vu

Years ago we as a management team faced the problem of a coverage offering that had overwhelming choice.  We had 11 different benefit plans being offered from up to seven different carriers.  This created a couple of core issues: 

1)     Consumers (who were actually employees of small employer groups) were confused.  Brokers selling the plan wanted to ensure the employer (as the ultimate decision maker) and his/her employees were happy.  To keep all parties smiling, the brokers often remained very close to the selection process and offered advisement based on their expert knowledge.  The vast majority of brokers represented all as it should be.  Some other brokers took other approaches and proactively limited the choices by informing the employees some plans/carriers were not part of the offering - even though this was not true and was against the design of the product.  Further, some of these brokers even created their own sales collateral only showing the two or three options they were most comfortable selling.  The outcome of this was some of the carrier who were "screened-out" not being too happy about working to be part of a package offering and then not being shown to potential enrollees.

2)     A broad offering of many plan types and carriers creates a more complex array of plan selections.  And thus, a more complex assessment of risk management.  Needing to incorporate this risk into their entire product portfolio, carriers rightfully looked closely at the membership garnered through each sales channel.  Carriers always look closely at small group business.  This said, with our offering they may only get a part of group's potential membership and not all of it, thus they looked even closer at plan selection and utilization coming from us.  And in fact there were "winners" and "losers" between the plan designs and carriers.  We had a risk adjustment process in place, but as you could imagine it had occasion to not make all the players happy. 

So, brokers were not always so much working from the perspective of providing great service, they were working from the perspective that their efforts were what was as a minimum needed to sell the product.  They were surviving our product, not actively selling it!  And carriers were each doing deeper assessment as to remain as part of the product offering or not. 

While not a perfect corollary, the above does share many of the characteristics of the issues shaping up for the new Exchange world.  What is important to note is that while there are risk management provisions in existence right now that did not exist pre-Affordable Care Act (ACA), fact is two of the three risk mitigation tools put in place go away after 2017.  The only one left after that will be risk adjustment.  Thus, putting our longer term thinking caps on, we would do good consider how actions now will affect the lessening of risk mitigation as time marches forward. 

A plausible approach

With rules in place that force actuarial values to be +/-2% of a set target for each metal tier, how much is really gained by offering 8-10 offerings per tier?  Don't forget that deductibles, copays and coinsurances are complicated concepts for many looking to make their selection.  And, it can be seen that this much selection turns-off consumers to the carriers and the exchanges putting forth this tsunami of odd-ball terms.  While confused about what each offering is, the consumer at least walks away understanding very clearly any of these options will cost them money!

Right now carriers and exchanges are in a land grab for membership.  Exchanges want to reach thresholds for operational independence per the ACA legislation and carriers want to ensure market share of the new growth provided by subsidized membership.  It is in both the interest of the exchange and the carriers to put in place rules that align the distribution offering to their shared goals.  Carriers have the opportunity to work under this discipline relatively fast - and become winners.  However, for the Exchange this may mean considering collaboration in changing the rules under which their particular Exchange operates.  And while it may seem that the focus here is on the financials, risk mitigation, and operations expenditures of maintaining massive benefit portfolios, remember what all this work is focused on:  It allows for a better consumer experience.  And with the consumer in this case being people who are making healthcare selections appropriate for them, that's pretty significant. 

Years ago while facing the situation outlined above, the approach we took was to launch a streamlined offering with a built-in common comparison point for consumers, and then opened up offerings carriers could make to designs of their choice.  This very much helped the consumers make decisions and carriers to manage their portfolios.  A true win-win which sold quite well.  There are reasons this can't be cut-and-paste duplicated today.  And there are serious considerations to where the pendulum swing between "wide-open" and "managed" offerings should be measured.  All this said, what is important is to realize we have available to us a viable approach which can be evolved to work within the new health care environment. 

 

1 Comment

    Blog Archives

    September 2015
    July 2015
    April 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    October 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    May 2013
    September 2011

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.