Leadership
Health Care Under Trump

The Committed Perspective — Policy Principles for Regional Health Plans

Article · October 18, 2017

At a recent Washington gathering, a bipartisan contingent of health policy wonks compared the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to the Beatles. Take away the individual mandate and purchasing subsidies, and you’re left with George and Ringo. Wipe out the Medicaid expansion and you’re down to just Ringo — a good drummer, but hardly enough to provide a reminder of the music being missed.

As lawmakers engaged in a contentious debate over the dismantling of the ACA, the discussion focused on what might be lost if various parts of it were removed. To what extent might insurers pull out of various markets? Would health care providers slow down the move to value-based payment programs? And how many millions of patients would lose insurance or otherwise be harmed as a result? The withdrawal of the proposed Republican replacement legislation on March 24, 2017, provided a reprieve from the immediate threat to the ACA, but efforts to unwind it continue, and all stakeholders agree that the status quo is not stable.

There is a path forward, the outlines of which are informed by what we call “the committed perspective.” Throughout the debate over the possible repeal of the ACA, insurers who did not have the option of withdrawing from their communities and providers who could not turn away their patients could only spend so much time asking, “How bad will this be?” Our experiences with regional, nonprofit health plans — particularly those that are closely aligned with provider organizations — suggest that different questions are relevant for stakeholders that are irrevocably committed to their communities. They must ask “What comes next?” and “How do we make it work?”

When we say “committed,” we mean “in it for the long haul.” Regional health plans cannot withdraw from their regions — they have nowhere else to go. And because they have deep roots in their communities, they tend to collaborate closely with local providers; many, such as Geisinger Health Plan in central Pennsylvania and SelectHealth in Utah, are part of provider organizations that are equally committed to their regions.

Being committed reduces one’s flexibility but brings a certain clarity to strategic thinking. Regardless of whether they practice in a state that is led by Republicans or Democrats, health care providers are better off if their patients have insurance. If health insurance in their community is “broken,” regional health plans have to figure out how to make it work. Failure is not an option.

In that context, committed stakeholders must focus not just on which parts of the ACA to fight hardest to preserve, but also on what core principles should characterize coverage and care in the future (see Principles for Health Plans Committed to Their Communities). Collectively, we have to reflect on what we have learned during the past 7 years — and the fact is, we’ve learned a lot. One of the key lessons is that we need a health insurance system that’s less about gamesmanship and more about value.

Principles for Regional Health Plans Committed to Their Communities

  Click To Enlarge.

The first principle, in our view, is that universal participation is central to success. To have uninsured citizens is not just morally intolerable, it is also illogical. Insurance should be about managing risk, not avoiding it. If insurance is optional, the focus for whoever is paying for care is shedding as much responsibility for costs as possible. That approach provides a lazy way out of our health care finance challenges, and that lazy way will ultimately prove unsustainable and thus short term.

The second principle is that the movement from volume to value as the focus for payment must continue. This principle is intertwined with the first, since universal access makes payment models that reward efficiency inevitable (unless all stakeholders somehow develop a preference for pay cuts).

The third major principle is that the needs of patients must be the dominant focus of health care financing — rather than preservation of the business viability of payers or providers in their current structures. This principle requires changes in the way care is actually delivered and in the way payers work with providers. Simply shifting risk from payers to providers is not enough to ensure that care will improve. At the same time, providers must be responsible financial stewards in partnership with their patients and health plans.

That insight leads to the fourth principle, which is that the marketplace needs innovation at every level from both health plans and providers — including creativity in benefit design, care delivery, and payer–provider collaboration. We think these types of innovations are best driven by the combination of competition and commitment — the latter implying that stakeholders cannot simply exit markets when conditions are adverse. For this reason, we support the policies of some states (such as California and Pennsylvania) that health plans that exit insurance exchanges cannot reenter for some designated period. Such a requirement forces payers to focus on creating value over the long term rather than simply cutting losses.

The fifth principle is that to develop innovations that create real value, payers and providers have to collaborate on improving outcomes. The organizations with which we work have long recognized that when the relationship between payers and providers is mainly a struggle over money, patients lose because their needs are not prioritized. But when payers and providers are aligned with one another in aiming to improve value, combine data, and rationalize payment models, it’s possible to better manage chronic conditions, reduce low-value care, and address the social needs that drive so many adverse health outcomes.

We know from experience that better results are possible when organizations are ready to collaborate across traditional silos. For example, by embedding behavioral health case managers in primary care offices, Capital District Physicians’ Health Plan in upstate New York reduced emergency department visits by 76% for patients with mental health conditions, saving more than $1,100 per patient. To meet social needs, collaboration with regional organizations outside the health care sector is often essential. Presbyterian Healthcare Services in New Mexico for instance, works with La Cosecha, a community-supported agriculture program, to grow fruits and vegetables and distribute them to low-income families.

It might seem idealistic to talk about principles and hopes at a time when elected officials are still focused on what reductions in access to health insurance are politically viable. But the health of millions of Americans remains at risk if leaders simply try to minimize the damage. We think health care is just one area in which Americans are rediscovering the values and principles that matter most to them. These five principles seem likely to define the goals and nature of collaboration, and asserting them now can guide policy positions in the months ahead.

 

SOURCE INFORMATION

From the Alliance of Community Health Plans, Washington, DC (C.C.); Press Ganey, Wakefield, MA (T.H.L.); and Harvard Medical School, Boston (T.H.L.).

This Perspective article originally appeared in The New England Journal of Medicine and then in NEJM Catalyst on June 2, 2017.

New Call for Submissions ­to NEJM Catalyst

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

More From Leadership
Tom Lee Talk the Secret Sauce of Health Care Management

In Search of the Health Care Management Secret Sauce

Creating sustained change comes from a leader who does more than just inspire.

Medicine Is Not Manufacturing

Treating medicine as just another business is to deny its soul, the essential element that has given patients comfort and relief for thousands of years.

Lessons in Leadership: Transformative Collaboration Across the Care Continuum

Collaborative relationships across settings are critical to optimizing care, yet difficult to achieve.

Repeal, Replace, Repair, Retreat — Republicans’ Health Care Quagmire

Republicans’ Senate misadventures with the Affordable Care Act offer a powerful reminder about the limits of political power in the United States.

Turmoil in the Individual Insurance Market — Where It Came From and How to Fix It

The threat to individual market stability is real. We need to fix it before it's too late.

Health Care Leaders: Bill or No Bill, We Still Have Work to Do

Members of the IHI Leadership Alliance on the enduring significance of the Triple Aim.

cost-sharing reduction payments

Infographic: The Loss of Cost-Sharing Reduction Payments Would Destabilize Insurance Markets

The loss of CSR payments would create some short term chaos in the market, but it would not significantly impact the number of people covered.

No Stories Without Data, No Data Without Stories

We must remember to listen to the stories of the human beings on the receiving end of the policies we develop.

Distribution of Unique Adult Patients Presenting to Ambulatory Care and ED by Insurance Status, Jan 2013- Jan 2017 at NYC Health + Hospitals Safety Net

Coverage Expansion and Delivery System Reform in the Safety Net: Two Sides of the Same Coin

Safety-net health system transformation is threatened by recent health reform proposals that erode coverage gains.

Estimates of the Effect of Health Insurance Coverage on Emergency Department Visits / ED Use

Health Insurance and Emergency Department Use — A Complex Relationship

The relationship between health insurance and emergency care isn’t straightforward.

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

Topics

Repeal, Replace, Repair, Retreat — Republicans’…

Republicans’ Senate misadventures with the Affordable Care Act offer a powerful reminder about the limits…

Reframing the Conversation on Drug Pricing

We can’t afford for current trends to continue. There is only one solution.

Progress and Path Forward on Delivery…

The basic goals of delivery system reform — to promote quality and value in our…

Insights Council

Have a voice. Join other health care leaders effecting change, shaping tomorrow.

Apply Now