Escrito por estudiantes que aprobaron Inmediatamente disponible después del pago Leer en línea o como PDF ¿Documento equivocado? Cámbialo gratis 4,6 TrustPilot
logo-home
Document preview thumbnail
Vista previa 4 fuera de 344 páginas
Resumen

Summary Managed Care Primer 2018 – Drivers of a dynamic and growing sector

Document preview thumbnail
Vista previa 4 fuera de 344 páginas

Managed Care Primer 2018 – Drivers of a dynamic and growing sector

Vista previa del contenido

Managed Care
Managed Care Primer 2018 – Drivers of a
dynamic and growing sector
Industry Overview Equity | 08 May 2018



Managed Care Primer – in-depth industry overview United States
Managed Care
In our seventh annual Managed Care Primer, we provide an overview of the $1 trillion
managed care industry and a detailed analysis of the industry’s growth drivers. This
Kevin Fischbeck, CFA
report is organized to help investors understand how managed care organizations Research Analyst
MLPF&S
(MCOs) make their money and what competitive advantages are necessary to succeed +1 646 855 5948
long term for each product type (commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid). In addition, we
review Health Care Reform, dual eligibles, investment portfolios, capital requirements, Catherine Anderson
Research Analyst
accounting nuances and non-core products. Finally, we lay out the case for sustained MLPF&S
earnings growth in the low double digits over the long term with mid-teens total returns. +1 646 855 4345


Low-double-digit long-term EPS growth, mid-teen returns
We believe that the group could show 10-13% long-term EPS growth. Top line growth Table 1: Managed care subsectors
of 6-9% appears achievable driven by 3-4% enrollment growth (well above population Market
cap
growth driven by strong government growth) and 3-5% net premium yields (5-7% cost
Ticker Company ($B)
trend less benefit buy downs and mix shift). While we’d expect a stable medical loss Diversified
ratio (MLR) within a given product, the shift toward government could drive MLR up for AET Aetna $56.8
a typical company. Meanwhile, modest leverage on G&A should offset this, leading to ANTM Anthem $61.3
EBITDA growth of 6-9%, in line with revenue growth. Finally, capital deployment through CI CIGNA $42.1
UNH UnitedHealth Group $232.8
a combination of share repurchase and acquisitions could push EPS growth to 10-13%.
In addition to this EPS growth, most large cap MCOs pay a dividend in the 1.5% range. Medicare
HUM Humana $39.9
Analyzing the impact of HC reform on each subsector
We provide a detailed review of Health Care Reform and the implications for the sector, Medicaid
CNC Centene Corporation $20.7
analyzing the outlooks for the exchanges, Medicaid expansion, and Medicare Advantage
MOH Molina Healthcare $5.5
(MA). We view MA as the fastest growing sector in managed care over the next 10+ WCG WellCare Health Plans $9.9
years, driven by aging baby boomers, increased penetration, and improving rates. Source: Bloomberg, BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

Keys: Scale, medical mgmt and quality
Competitive advantages vary between products, but scale is a common denominator.
Companies with large membership bases can generate lower overhead costs per
member by leveraging technology investments and care management platforms. SG&A
leverage is even more important post Health Care Reform when gross margins are
capped through minimum MLR. Meanwhile, given that much of the future membership
growth is coming from government businesses where pricing is dictated to the MCOs,
medical management capabilities increasingly are a differentiator. Finally, quality is
increasingly being factored into the reimbursement system.

We address some commonly asked questions
We address a number of commonly asked questions including: If managed care
companies save money, why is commercial cost trend so high? How does Health Care
Reform impact managed care? What is the outlook for the public exchanges? What
indicates that a company is well reserved? How fast can Medicare Advantage grow as a
percentage of Medicare enrollment? Why would Medicaid Managed Care rates hold
steady during a time of state budget issues? What are block grants and what would the
impact be to Medicaid Managed Care? Vertical integration and what other areas are
MCOs investing in? How much of tax reform can MCOs keep?


BofA Merrill Lynch does and seeks to do business with issuers covered in its research reports.
As a result, investors should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could
affect the objectivity of this report. Investors should consider this report as only a single
factor in making their investment decision.
Refer to important disclosures on page 342 to 344. Analyst Certification on page 340. Price
Objective Basis/Risk on page 339. 11872349

Timestamp: 08 May 2018 12:05AM EDT
W

,Contents
Industry overview 3
Commercial business 7
Medicare business 75
Medicare Part D business 121
Medicaid business 128
Dual eligibles 149
Other services 155
Capital analysis 170
Tax reform 183
Health care reform 198
Evolving payment models 238
Accountable Care Organizations 246
Capitation 252
Accounting 275
Valuation 299
Company snapshots 304
Glossary 335




2 Managed Care | 08 May 2018
W

,Introduction
In our seventh annual Managed Care Primer, we provide an overview of the $1 trillion
managed care industry and a detailed analysis of the industry’s growth drivers. This
report is organized to help investors understand how managed care organizations
(MCOs) make their money and what competitive advantages are necessary to succeed
long term for each product type (commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid). In addition, we
review Health Care Reform, dual eligibles, investment portfolios, capital requirements,
accounting nuances and non-core products. Finally, we lay out the case for sustained
earnings growth in the low double digits over the long term with mid-teens total
returns.

If managed care companies save money, why is commercial cost trend so high? See
Commercial cost trends

How does Health Care Reform impact managed care? See Health care reform

What is the outlook for the public exchanges? See What is the outlook for the public
exchanges?

What indicates that a company is well reserved? See Accounting: Reserves

How fast can Medicare Advantage grow as a percentage of Medicare enrollment? See
CBO projects MA enrollment will continue to rise

Why would Medicaid Managed Care rates hold steady during a time of state budget
issues? See Rates are more closely tied to MCO margins than state budgets

What are block grants and what would the impact be to Medicaid Managed Care? See
Impact of Medicaid block grants

Vertical integration and what other areas are MCOs investing in? See Other services

How much of tax reform can MCOs keep? See Tax reform

Industry overview
Managed care organizations (MCOs) provide and administer health insurance through
risk-based and administrative services only (ASO) products. Most of the publicly traded
companies primarily focus on the U.S. managed care industry, which has a market size
of over $1 trillion. There are multiple products in the managed care industry with
fundamentally different characteristics (see Table 2). Accordingly, it is important to
recognize the varying product mixes at the publicly traded companies when analyzing
industry trends.

There are three main business categories:
• Commercial. Health insurance for employees and individuals/families.

• Medicare. Health insurance (Medicare Advantage) and drug coverage (Medicare
Part D) for seniors (age 65+).

• Medicaid. Health insurance for low income individuals.

The publicly traded companies are most exposed to the commercial business on a
market weighted basis, so the prospects of the commercial business will generally drive
group stock performance. However, the government businesses are the fastest growing
and are therefore increasingly important. We review the different products in more
detail below.




Managed Care | 08 May 2018 3
W

, Table 2: Product Overview
Commercial Non-
Commercial Risk risk Medicare Advantage Medicare - Part D Managed Medicaid
Health insurance for poor
Administrativ e services
Health insurance for Health insurance Prescription drug plans people; administrativ e
Description for employ ers with self-
groups and indiv iduals for Seniors for Seniors serv ices for state
funded plans
Medicaid programs
Customer Groups and indiv iduals Employ ers Federal gov 't/Seniors Federal gov 't/Seniors States/poor people
Market size (est. 2018) $390bn $30bn $230bn $110bn $310bn
Total enrollment 81m 95m 21m 45m 55m
Revenue PMPM (est. 2018) $400 $25 $900 $120 $200-$2,000
Pre-tax margin (est. 2018) 4-7% 15% 5% 3% 3%
Profit PMPM (est. 2018) $16-28 $4 $45 $4 $6-60
% of core medical enrollment
AET 19% 58% 6% 9% 8%
ANTM 18% 63% 2% 1% 16%
CNC 17% 0% 4% 0% 79%
CI 18% 75% 3% 5% 0%
HUM 12% 4% 31% 50% 3%
MOH 18% 0% 1% 0% 81%
UNH 20% 43% 10% 11% 16%
WCG 0% 0% 11% 26% 62%
Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research


Companies generally don’t break out earnings exposure by product. However, below we
show our estimates for 2019E standalone earnings exposure by product by MCO.
Notably, UNH has the largest “other” exposure by far, driven by Optum, while we
estimate that CNC also derives a substantial amount of its earnings from its services
business.
Table 3: Earnings exposure by product estimates
2019E pretax
earnings % by Commercial Commercial Medicare Medicare - Managed
product Risk Non-risk Advantage Part D Medicaid International Other
AET 36% 23% 24% 1% 5% 2% 9%
ANTM 42% 22% 9% 1% 17% 0% 10%
CNC 14% 18% 2% 0% 20% 2% 44%
CI 26% 21% 6% 1% 1% 15% 31%
HUM 12% 1% 62% 3% 2% 0% 19%
MOH 8% 0% 9% 0% 61% 0% 23%
UNH 12% 4% 19% 1% 7% 3% 52%
WCG 0% 0% 38% 3% 49% 0% 10%
Source: Company reports, BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research estimates


Primarily a U.S.-focused industry
Most of the publicly traded managed care companies have limited international
exposure with the exception of CIGNA (CI) and UnitedHealth Group (UNH). More
recently, other companies have indicated interest in expanding their international
businesses in a more meaningful way.

The international business represents a faster revenue growth opportunity than the U.S.
business given the nascent market for health insurance in many countries. However,
there is significantly less visibility into the operating fundamentals of international
business given significant health care system differences between countries.

Long-term EPS growth of 10-13%
We believe that the group could show 10-13% long-term EPS growth. Top line growth
of 6-9% appears achievable driven by 3-4% enrollment growth (well above population
growth driven by strong government growth) and 3-5% net premium yields (5-7% cost
trend less benefit buy downs and mix shift). To the extent that companies focus more
on government growth, membership growth will be higher but rate growth will be lower.
Overall, while we’d expect a stable medical loss ratio (MLR) within a given product, the
shift toward government should drive MLR up for a typical company. Meanwhile, modest


4 Managed Care | 08 May 2018
W

Índice general

  1. 01 Contents 1
  2. 02 Introduction 3
  3. 03 Industry overview 3
    1. Primarily a U.S.-focused industry 4
    2. Long-term EPS growth of 10-13% 4
    3. Growth for government businesses slightly higher 5
    4. Introduction 8
    5. Review of different plan types 8
    6. HMO = Health Maintenance Organization 8
    7. PPO = Preferred Provider Organization 8
    8. POS = Point of Service 8
    9. CDHP = Consumer Directed Health Plan 8
    10. Commercial risk business overview 8
    11. Risk-based capital levels can influence commercial risk pricing 10
    12. Commercial ASO 11
    13. Breakdown of Risk versus ASO 13
    14. ASO + Stop Loss expands market to smaller employers 13
    15. But adding Stop Loss could expose ASO business to trend 14
    16. Competitive advantages: local share, national scale 15
    17. High local market share enables better provider discounts 15
    18. SG&A leverage further lowers input cost per member 15
    19. What investors often miss 16
    20. Scale matters (local scale most of all) 16
    21. Little medical management today 16
    22. Overview of Blue Cross/Blue Shield Plans 17
    23. Commercial pricing 19
    24. Case study: AET repricing in 2009-2010 20
    25. Meaning of “mispricing” depends on context 21
    26. 1. Misestimating cost trend 21
    27. 2. Deliberately pricing below cost trend 21
    28. Pricing yields generally in mid-single digits 21
    29. Impossible to reconcile trend and reported cost growth or pricing 22
    30. Regulatory review of rates varies by state 22
    31. In the short term, rate review may make pricing more rational 23
    32. Pricing is competitive, influenced by margins and capital 23
    33. Commercial enrollment 24
    34. Beware of outlier enrollment growth 25
    35. Case study: AET enrollment growth in 2008-2009 26
    36. Commercial cost trends 27
    37. There are four major components to medical costs: 28
    38. Employer pays for most of cost 29
    39. The rise of high out of pocket costs 30
    40. The system works against MCOs managing cost 31
    41. Brief history of commercial managed care 31
    42. Commercial subsidizes underfunding from government/uninsured 32
    43. Cost trend guidance is important directionally 33
    44. Pricing to cost trend is key – not the cost trend itself 34
    45. COBRA enrollment runs at a high MLR 35
    46. Health Care Reform should mitigate COBRA 36
    47. Commercial Health Care Reform changes 36
    48. 2010 36
    49. 2011 37
    50. 2014 37
    51. 2015 38
    52. 2016 39
    53. 2022 39
    54. Reform created public health care exchanges 39
    55. Plans organized by metal tier 39
    56. Incentives to buy insurance 40
    57. Open enrollment period 41
    58. Individual versus small group exchanges 41
    59. Penalty on insurers who exit a market 41
    60. Why exchanges will be a low margin business 42
    61. There will continue to be a market outside of exchanges 43
    62. Grandfathered plans will need to be sold outside of exchanges 43
    63. Cancelation outrage led extension of non-grandfathered non-ACA plans 43
    64. Exchanges must provide value to attract enrollment 43
    65. Plans on exchanges have additional requirements 44
    66. Managing risks on the exchanges – The “Three R’s” 44
    67. Permanent risk adjusters 45
    68. Transitional reinsurance 45
    69. Temporary risk corridors 46
    70. Running the exchange: state vs federal 46
    71. “Dumping” likely a small group issue, if at all 47
    72. Why would employers dump? 48
    73. Large groups: dumping not beneficial, on average 49
    74. Large group employers of low wage earners could dump 50
    75. Employers with a concentration of low wage workers 50
    76. Employers with low wage workers who have families 51
    77. Small groups: more likely to drop coverage 52
    78. Survey: 5% of large-group ASO employers planning on dropping coverage 53
    79. Small group – 8% looking at dumping vs 14% in 2017 survey 53
    80. Large group – risk 3% looking at dumping vs 25% in 2017 survey 54
    81. Large group – ASO 5% looking at dumping vs 52% in 2017 survey 54
    82. Employer response 55
    83. Small groups may reduce full-time employee head counts 55
    84. What is the outlook for the public exchanges? 56
    85. Publicly traded MCOs believed they were being conservative 56
    86. “If you like it, you can keep it” an early blow to the risk pool 56
    87. Enrollment has been lower than expected 57
    88. Less dumping was part of the cause 58
    89. As expected, the exchange population have been heavy utilizers 58
    90. Pricing timeline means it takes multiple years to correct pricing mistakes 59
    91. Low visibility into risk adjustment accruals 60
    92. Risk corridor funding not available at expected levels 61
    93. Special enrollment period added to adverse selection 61
    94. Exchange outlook for 2018 63
    95. Potential marketplace enrollees unaware of key enrollment dates 63
    96. Navigator funding cut by 41% 64
    97. Headwind #3: CSR defunding 65
    98. Tailwind #1: Strategic exits 66
    99. Tailwind #2: Rational pricing 66
    100. Tailwind #3: Potential leverage with states 67
    101. Despite concerns, repricing shouldn’t create a “death spiral” 68
    102. Optimism for improved profitability 69
    103. Private exchanges 69
    104. Single-carrier vs multi-carrier 70
    105. Major private exchange platforms 70
    106. Buy downs save $ in Year 1 71
    107. But cost trend does not go away 71
    108. Notable employers utilizing private exchanges 72
    109. Economic impact to MCOs 72
    110. Negatives 72
    111. Positives 73
    112. Momentum slowed, but Cadillac Tax may be a catalyst 74
    113. Introduction 76
    114. Background on the Medicare program 76
    115. Part A – Hospital Insurance 76
    116. Part B – Supplementary Medical Insurance 77
    117. Part C – Medicare Advantage 78
    118. Part D – Outpatient prescription drugs for seniors 79
    119. Medicare business overview 79
    120. Medicare coverage combinations 79
    121. Medicare Advantage 80
    122. Minimum loss ratios (effective 1/1/14) add component to business model 81
    123. Group MA is 20% of MA membership 82
    124. Medicare Supplement Insurance (Medigap) 82
    125. Medigap membership growing 5%-6% per year 83
    126. Types of Medigap policies 83
    127. MA competitive advantages: medical management, quality, SG&A scale 84
    128. Superior medical management lowers costs 84
    129. Quality matters 84
    130. SG&A leverage further lowers input cost per member 85
    131. What investors often miss 85
    132. 1) MA rate cuts do not necessarily fall to bottom line 85
    133. 2) MA competes against Medicare FFS + Part D + Medigap 85
    134. Example of FFS versus Medicare Advantage economics 85
    135. 3) MA is an individual product – different than commercial 86
    136. 4) The rate update includes prior trend 87
    137. 5) Quality increasingly matters 87
    138. Rebates (and extra benefits) are also impacted 87
    139. Star ratings helped plans mitigate benefit cuts 89
    140. Star ratings can help growth 89
    141. Technical analysis of Stars 90
    142. What is a Star rating? 90
    143. Levels of Stars 90
    144. Sources for Stars 90
    145. Stars methods 91
    146. Clustering methodology 91
    147. Example: “higher is better” measure 92
    148. Example: “lower is better” measure 92
    149. Relative distribution and significance testing 92
    150. CAHPS Star assignment rules 93
    151. Fixed cut points 93
    152. Weighting of measure Stars 93
    153. Stars math 94
    154. Applying the reward factor 95
    155. Mean calculation 95
    156. Mean categories 95
    157. Variance calculation 95
    158. Variance categories 96
    159. Applying the Categorical Adjustment Index (CAI) factor 96
    160. LIS/DE deciles 97
    161. LIS/DE quintiles 97
    162. CMS rounding rules 97
    163. Applying the improvement measure(s) 97
    164. Stars calculation example 98
    165. Sample final overall rating calculation 100
    166. Implications of a contract right on the edge 100
    167. Medicare reimbursement methodology 100
    168. Medicare Advantage 100
    169. Payment structure 101
    170. Quality bonus payments 103
    171. The impact of Stars will vary by company 103
    172. HC Reform requires coding adjustments beginning in 2014 103
    173. Potential coding changes are a risk 104
    174. Future of the shift from coding to encounter data over time is unclear 105
    175. Risk adjustment blend 105
    176. Minimum MLR of 85% began in 2014 105
    177. Medicare Advantage rates slightly above FFS in 2018 105
    178. Impact of cuts depends on response by plan 106
    179. Implications of business repricing once per year mixed 106
    180. Medicare catalyst calendar 107
    181. Rate notices 107
    182. Bidding timeline 108
    183. Marketing begins October 1 108
    184. Star ratings release 108
    185. Enrollment timeline 108
    186. Medicare enrollment 109
    187. UNH and HUM dominate in Medicare Advantage 109
    188. UNH, CNC, AET, WCG, HUM, and ANTM have gained share over time 110
    189. UNH and HUM dominate in individual MA 111
    190. AET, HUM, CNC, WCG, UNH, and ANTM have gained share over time 111
    191. UNH and AET dominate in Group MA 112
    192. UNH has gained significant share in Group MA; HUM, others have lost share 112
    193. Group MA to see increased penetration, but likely a declining pool 113
    194. Baby Boomer tailwind over the next decade 114
    195. CBO projects MA enrollment will continue to rise 116
    196. Medicare cost trend 117
    197. HMO plans better positioned to respond to rate cuts 118
    198. Medicare - Health Care Reform changes 118
    199. 2011 119
    200. 2012 119
    201. 2014 119
    202. Introduction 122
    203. Prescription drug plans (Medicare Part D) 122
    204. Part D is not “insurance” in the typical sense 123
    205. Payment structure 123
    206. Enrollee premiums are determined in a two-step process by CMS 125
    207. Government pays premiums for low-income subsidy (LIS) beneficiaries 125
    208. Prescription drug plans (Part D) enrollment 126
    209. LT demographics clear, but less of a penetration story than MA 127
    210. Introduction 129
    211. Medicaid business overview 131
    212. Competitive advantages: medical mgmt, SG&A scale 135
    213. Superior medical management lowers costs 135
    214. SG&A leverage further lowers input cost per member 136
    215. What investors often miss 136
    216. Rates are more closely tied to MCO margins than state budgets 136
    217. Leverage Medicaid FFS rates – high local market share not critical 136
    218. Medicaid reimbursement 137
    219. Membership growth can impact average rate 137
    220. Impact of the industry fee on Medicaid 138
    221. Medicaid enrollment 138
    222. Medicaid Managed Care 139
    223. Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 139
    224. RFP + implementation calendar 140
    225. Impact of Medicaid block grants 142
    226. Dual eligibles are significant opportunity 143
    227. Medicaid cost trend 143
    228. Pricing is generally community rated 144
    229. Geography is key 144
    230. Margin outlook: 1.5%+ adj for competitor mix 145
    231. Lowest margin: Medicaid HMOs vs each other (Georgia) 145
    232. Case study: calculating sustainable margins in Georgia Medicaid 145
    233. Medicaid Health Care Reform changes 146
    234. Medicaid Expansion has been a positive for MCOs 147
    235. Health Care Reform 148
    236. 2010 148
    237. 2014 148
    238. Introduction 150
    239. Integrating the Dual Eligible Population 152
    240. Early dual demos disappointing, long term still has promise 153
    241. Exposure to duals 154
    242. Introduction 156
    243. International 156
    244. CI sells both individual and group products internationally 156
    245. UNH purchased Amil to enter Brazil market 156
    246. Brand name and scale matter 157
    247. Strong provider network 158
    248. High quality and natural consolidator in space 160
    249. Leverage point to grow Optum 160
    250. UNH bought Banmédica to expand its reach in Latin America 160
    251. AET targeting international growth 161
    252. CNC has international business in Spain and UK 161
    253. Disability and Life insurance 161
    254. Health Care IT 162
    255. Recent health care IT transactions 162
    256. Pharmacy benefit management (PBM) 164
    257. Branded vs generic drugs 166
    258. Behavioral health 167
    259. Disease management and wellness 168
    260. Provider services 168
    261. Introduction 171
    262. Risk-Based Capital (RBC) 171
    263. RBC ratio: Total capital divided by minimum capital 171
    264. Regulatory action based on RBC ratio level 171
    265. Blue Cross Blue Shield Plans must maintain RBC ratio of at least 375% 172
    266. RBC formula applies risk factors to calculate minimum capital 172
    267. Publicly traded companies are well capitalized 173
    268. RBC ratios can have implications for pricing 174
    269. Some states place limits on RBC ratios (eg, Pennsylvania) 174
    270. Some states consider RBC ratios when approving rates (eg, New York) 175
    271. Investment income 175
    272. Balance sheets 178
    273. Capital deployment 179
    274. Parent cash 180
    275. Example of parent cash flow bridge 180
    276. First use of cash is funding internal growth 180
    277. Fast growth means less capital deployment (and vice versa) 180
    278. Share repurchase has been primary use of excess capital 181
    279. Sources for deployable capital: parent cash, cash flow, leverage 182
    280. How much of tax reform can MCOs keep? 184
    281. Commercial to keep 2/3 184
    282. Medicare Advantage to keep 2/3 184
    283. Medicare Part D to keep 2/3 184
    284. Medicaid to keep 1/2 184
    285. Other = mixed bag, but well positioned overall 184
    286. Analyzing the tax reform impact by MCO 185
    287. Earnings exposure by product 185
    288. Tax reform benefit kept by product 186
    289. Extra one-time HIF boost in 2018, repriced in 2019 186
    290. The mathematical offsets to lower taxes 186
    291. How lower taxes can increase rebates 186
    292. Rebate calculation formula 187
    293. Example of rebate calculation 187
    294. Impact of Rebates on Commercial 188
    295. Impact of Rebates on Medicare 189
    296. MLR floor rebates are likely not as big of a limiting factor in Medicaid 189
    297. HIF gross-up impact on 2018/2019 tax reform 190
    298. HIF return gross-up math leads to 2019 headwinds 190
    299. No revenue impact, but an EPS impact from HIF gross up in MA 191
    300. HIF gross up revenue but to EPS impact in Medicaid 191
    301. Competition and tax reform 191
    302. Competition in Commercial 192
    303. Competition in MA 193
    304. Worst case scenario is better membership growth and +1% to EPS 194
    305. Medicaid: rate risk over time 194
    306. Rates focus on pre-tax margins, but over time, could adjust 194
    307. Other services a key driver to maintaining tax benefit 195
    308. AET 195
    309. What we estimated 195
    310. What they said 195
    311. ANTM 195
    312. What we estimated 195
    313. What they said 195
    314. CNC 195
    315. What we estimated 195
    316. What they said 196
    317. CI 196
    318. What we estimated 196
    319. What they said 196
    320. HUM 196
    321. What we estimated 196
    322. What they said 196
    323. MOH 196
    324. What we estimated 196
    325. What they said 197
    326. UNH 197
    327. What we estimated 197
    328. What they said 197
    329. WCG 197
    330. What we estimated 197
    331. What they said 197
    332. Introduction 199
    333. Commercial 200
    334. 2010 200
    335. 2011 200
    336. 2014 200
    337. 2015 202
    338. 2016 202
    339. 2022 202
    340. Minimum MLR more manageable than initially feared 202
    341. Rate review more headline risk than earnings 203
    342. In the short term, rate review may have made pricing more rational 203
    343. Changes in 2014 and beyond 203
    344. Overview of the public exchanges 203
    345. Incentives to buy insurance 204
    346. Open enrollment period 205
    347. Individual versus small group exchanges 206
    348. Penalty on insurers who exit a market 206
    349. Why exchanges will be a low margin business 206
    350. There will continue to be a market outside of exchanges 207
    351. Grandfathered plans will need to be sold outside of exchanges 207
    352. Cancelation outrage led extension of non-grandfathered non-ACA plans 208
    353. Exchanges must provide value to attract enrollment 208
    354. Plans on exchanges have additional requirements 208
    355. Short-term limited duration insurance (ST LDI) plans 209
    356. eHealth report on ST plans 209
    357. Association Health Plans 213
    358. Potential impact of expanding access to AHPs 213
    359. Managing risks on the exchanges – The “Three R’s” 214
    360. Permanent risk adjusters 214
    361. Transitional reinsurance 214
    362. Temporary risk corridors 215
    363. Running the exchange: state vs federal 216
    364. Is there enough incentive to get healthy people to buy? 217
    365. Potential impact of individual mandate repeal 217
    366. Subsidies and Cost Share Reduction subsidies 218
    367. Repealing the Cost Share Reduction subsidy a modest negative 219
    368. “Dumping” likely a small group issue, if at all 219
    369. Why would employers dump? 219
    370. Large groups: dumping not beneficial, on average 220
    371. Large group employers of low wage earners could dump 222
    372. Employers with a concentration of low wage workers 222
    373. Employers with low wage workers who have families 223
    374. Small groups: more likely to drop coverage 224
    375. Survey: 5% of large-group ASO employers planning on dropping coverage 224
    376. Small group – 8% looking at dumping vs 14% in 2017 survey 225
    377. Large group – risk 3% looking at dumping vs 25% in 2017 survey 225
    378. Large group – ASO 5% looking at dumping vs 52% in 2017 survey 226
    379. Employer response 226
    380. Small groups may reduce full-time employee head counts 226
    381. Medicare 227
    382. Timeline of Health Care Reform changes 227
    383. 2011 227
    384. 2012 227
    385. 2014 228
    386. Medicare Advantage rates phased down to FFS 228
    387. Stars: Implementing a quality component 229
    388. Rebates for extra benefits also lower beginning in 2012 229
    389. HC Reform implemented coding adjustments beginning in 2014 229
    390. Minimum MLR of 85% began in 2014 230
    391. Cuts likely restricted growth, but no longer a headwind 230
    392. Medicaid Health Care Reform changes 230
    393. 2010 231
    394. 2014 231
    395. Drug rebate equalization a positive 231
    396. Medicaid expansion adds a new Medicaid classification 231
    397. Funding for the Medicaid expansion 232
    398. New populations have new needs 232
    399. Medicaid Expansion has been a positive for MCOs 233
    400. Medicaid expansion update 233
    401. Through Dec 2017, enrollment up 17.0M 234
    402. Enrollment in expansion states grew by 39% 234
    403. “Woodwork effect” - Enrollment in states that didn’t expand grew by 13% 235
    404. What is the remaining opportunity? 236
    405. Health plan industry fee 236
    406. Impact of the fee on the government businesses 237
    407. Reform a modest negative, tailwinds help 237
    408. Introduction 239
    409. Key takeaways 239
    410. Very little of current reimbursement is tied to performance, but it is growing 239
    411. Requirements to report quality data are followed by requirements to perform 239
    412. CMS taking the lead, and committing to increasing Pay for Performance is key 240
    413. Value based purchasing is the “new rate cut” 240
    414. Quality matters today and only will matter more going forward 240
    415. Technology will help, but physician engagement is vital 240
    416. For-profit providers not rushing toward new models, but are quietly preparing 241
    417. Hospitals are moving to Value Based Purchasing (VBP) out of fear, not greed 241
    418. Companies seem to want to learn from their past mistakes and taking it slow 241
    419. It will be difficult to offset lost inpatient volume with outpatient volume 241
    420. This will take time 242
    421. Managed care – company-specific exposure to new models 242
    422. AET exposure to new payment models – above average 242
    423. ANTM exposure to new payment models – average 242
    424. CI exposure to new payment models – average 242
    425. HUM Exposure to new payment models – above average 242
    426. UNH Exposure to new payment models – above average 242
    427. Fee for service vs fee for value 242
    428. Issues with the current system 243
    429. Costs are rising too quickly 243
    430. Health spending as a percentage of GDP 244
    431. Relative contributions 244
    432. Looking for a more sustainable approach – value-based care 245
    433. Value-based payments 245
    434. Bundled payments 245
    435. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) 245
    436. Capitation 245
  4. 04 Accountable Care Organizations 246
    1. Shared savings (upside potential, no downside risk) 247
    2. Pros and cons 247
    3. Financial model 247
    4. Shared risk (upside and downside potential) 248
    5. Pros and Cons 248
    6. Capitated ACOs 248
    7. Pros and Cons 248
    8. Medicare ACOs 249
    9. ACOs more common in markets with MA history 250
    10. Commercial ACOs 250
    11. Contrasting Commercial vs Medicare ACOs 250
    12. Not all commercial ACOs are the same 251
    13. Choosing a value-based partner 251
    14. Physician engagement 251
    15. Commitment 251
  5. 05 Capitation 252
    1. System design 252
    2. Past capitation efforts had mixed results 253
    3. Adjusting payments based on demographic factors 253
    4. The older, the costlier 253
    5. Issues with capitation 254
    6. Some providers can do it well already 255
    7. Value proposition for MCOs 256
    8. Focus on cost control delivers a lower cost plan and drives membership 256
    9. Capitation reduces MCO’s utilization risk, improves ability to price 256
    10. Aetna (AET) 257
    11. Exposure to new payment models 257
    12. Value-based payment models 257
    13. Accountable Care Solutions 258
    14. Criteria for ACO selection 259
    15. Gain sharing 259
    16. Where do the savings come from? 259
    17. Inova Health joint venture 259
    18. Banner | Aetna joint venture 259
    19. Measuring provider performance 260
    20. Healthagen 260
    21. Population health technology 260
    22. Clinical care management 261
    23. Value-based risk solutions 262
    24. Anthem (ANTM) 262
    25. Over 150 value-based ACOs 262
    26. Managing the total cost of care 262
    27. Enhanced Personal Health Care 262
    28. Success in California 262
    29. Bundled payments 263
    30. 90-day episodes in Wisconsin 263
    31. CIGNA (CI) 263
    32. Committed to the trend toward value-based care 263
    33. CIGNA Collaborative Care 263
    34. Size and scope 264
    35. Growth trajectory 264
    36. Selection process 265
    37. Program implementation 265
    38. Clinical programs and resources 265
    39. Leveraging data analytics 266
    40. Quality improvement and cost reduction 266
    41. Some reservations about capitation 267
    42. Humana (HUM) 267
    43. Exposure to new payment models 267
    44. Progress toward value-based care 267
    45. Care management statistics 268
    46. Accountable Care Continuum 268
    47. Provider Quality Rewards Program 268
    48. HUM Model Practice Program 269
    49. HUM Medical Home Program 269
    50. Transcend and Transcend Insights 269
    51. Leveraging information technology and data analytics 269
    52. Identifying areas for health care improvement 269
    53. Reducing readmissions 269
    54. UnitedHealth Group (UNH) 270
    55. Exposure to new payment models 270
    56. Partnering with the right providers 270
    57. Significant momentum in traditional and nontraditional markets 270
    58. Value-based spending goals 270
    59. Payment models 271
    60. Quality metric system 271
    61. Optum 272
    62. OptumHealth 273
    63. Collaborative Care 273
    64. Consumer Solutions Group 274
    65. OptumInsight 274
    66. OptumRx 274
    67. Accounting: Reserves 276
    68. What is the reserve? 276
    69. Incurred but not reported, or IBNR (80%) 276
    70. Margin for adverse development 276
    71. The reserve roll forward 277
    72. Example: AET 277
    73. Prior period development shows past reserve adequacy 278
    74. Example: AET 278
    75. Reserve analysis metrics 279
    76. Days claims payable 279
    77. Pros 280
    78. Cons 280
    79. Example: AET 280
    80. Reserve growth relative to premium growth 281
    81. Pros 281
    82. Cons 281
    83. Example: AET 282
    84. Completion factors 283
    85. Pros 284
    86. Cons 284
    87. Example: AET 284
    88. Lookback analysis, constant payment speed 285
    89. Pros 285
    90. Cons 285
    91. Example: AET 286
    92. Accounting: MLR rebates 286
    93. Rebate calculation formula 287
    94. Example of rebate calculation 287
    95. Accounting for rebates under GAAP 288
    96. Income statement 288
    97. GAAP rebate estimates must be trued up every quarter 289
    98. Higher rebates are generally a good sign 290
    99. Understanding prior period development in a post MLR minimum world 291
    100. Company responses to minimum MLR 292
    101. MLR upside still possible 293
    102. Accounting: Floors, Caps, Corridors 294
    103. MLR floors and MLR ceilings 294
    104. Profit caps 294
    105. Risk corridors 294
    106. Analyzing financial statements 294
    107. Metrics tied to premiums are affected 295
    108. Metrics to measure reserve adequacy 295
    109. Accounting: Premium Deficiency Reserves 295
    110. Introduction 300
    111. Commercial (diversified) 300
    112. Medicare 302
    113. Medicaid 303
    114. Aetna 305
    115. Key strengths 305
    116. Key issues 305
    117. Management team 306
    118. Mark T. Bertolini, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer 306
    119. Shawn M. Guertin, CFO and Chief Enterprise Risk Officer 306
    120. Karen S. Lynch, President 306
    121. AET historical forward P/E valuation, 2003 to present 307
    122. AET initial guidance compared to actual results 308
    123. Anthem 309
    124. Key strengths 309
    125. Key issues 309
    126. Management team 310
    127. Gail K. Boudreaux, President and Chief Executive Officer 310
    128. John E. Gallina, EVP and Chief Financial Officer 310
    129. Brian Griffin, EVP and CEO, IngenioRx 310
    130. Peter D. Haytaian, EVP and President, Commercial and Specialty Business 310
    131. ANTM enrollment by product, 2009-2017 311
    132. ANTM’s historical forward P/E valuation, 2001 to present 311
    133. ANTM initial guidance compared to actual results 312
    134. Centene 313
    135. Key strengths 313
    136. Key issues 313
    137. Management team 314
    138. Michael F. Neidorff, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer 314
    139. Jeffrey Schwaneke, Executive Vice President, CFO and Treasurer 314
    140. Cynthia J. Brinkley, President and COO 314
    141. CNC and S&P 500 historical forward P/E valuation 315
    142. CNC initial guidance compared to actual results 315
    143. CIGNA 316
    144. Key strengths 317
    145. Key issues 317
    146. Management team 318
    147. David Cordani, Chief Executive Officer and President 318
    148. Eric Palmer, Executive Vice President and CFO 318
    149. Chris Hocevar, President, Strategy, Segments and Solutions 318
    150. Brian Evanko, President, Government Business 318
    151. Health Care segment revenue by major product, 2010-2017 318
    152. CI historical forward P/E valuation, 2000 to present 319
    153. CI initial guidance compared to actual results 319
    154. Humana 320
    155. Retail segment membership and revenue mix 320
    156. Employer segment membership and revenue mix 321
    157. Key strengths 321
    158. Key issues 321
    159. Management team 322
    160. Bruce Broussard, President and Chief Executive Officer 322
    161. Brian Kane, Chief Financial Officer 322
    162. Cynthia H. Zipperle, Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer 322
    163. HUM’s historical forward P/E valuation, 2000 to present 322
    164. HUM initial guidance compared to actual results 323
    165. Molina Healthcare 324
    166. Key strengths 325
    167. Key issues 325
    168. Management team 326
    169. Joseph Zubretsky, President and Chief Executive Officer 326
    170. Joseph W. White, MBA, CPA, Chief Financial Officer 326
    171. Jeff D. Barlow, JD, MPH, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary 326
    172. MOH’s historical forward P/E valuation, 2003 to present 327
    173. MOH initial guidance compared to actual results 327
    174. UnitedHealth Group 328
    175. Key strengths 329
    176. Key issues 329
    177. Management team 329
    178. David S. Wichmann, Chief Executive Officer, UnitedHealth Group 329
    179. Larry C. Renfro, Vice Chairman, UnitedHealth Group; CEO, Optum 329
    180. Steve Nelson, Executive VP, UnitedHealth Group; CEO, UnitedHealthcare 330
    181. Enrollment and premium revenue by product 330
    182. UNH’s historical forward P/E valuation, 2000 to present 330
    183. UNH initial guidance compared to actual results 331
    184. WellCare Health Plans 332
    185. WCG enrollment by product and revenue mix 333
    186. Key strengths 333
    187. Key issues 333
    188. Management team 333
    189. Ken Burdick, Chief Executive Officer 333
    190. Drew Asher, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer 334
    191. WCG’s historical forward P/E valuation, 2004 to present 334
    192. WCG initial guidance compared to actual results 334
  6. 06 Disclosures 342
    1. Important Disclosures 342

Información del documento

Subido en
10 de julio de 2026
Número de páginas
344
Escrito en
2025/2026
Tipo
Resumen
$16.49

¿Documento equivocado? Cámbialo gratis Dentro de los 14 días posteriores a la compra y antes de descargarlo, puedes elegir otro documento. Puedes gastar el importe de nuevo.
Escrito por estudiantes que aprobaron
Inmediatamente disponible después del pago
Leer en línea o como PDF

Vendido
4
Seguidores
1
Artículos
282
Última venta
22 horas hace



Por qué los estudiantes eligen Stuvia

Creado por compañeros estudiantes, verificado por reseñas

Calidad en la que puedes confiar: escrito por estudiantes que aprobaron y evaluado por otros que han usado estos resúmenes.

¿No estás satisfecho? Elige otro documento

¡No te preocupes! Puedes elegir directamente otro documento que se ajuste mejor a lo que buscas.

Paga como quieras, empieza a estudiar al instante

Sin suscripción, sin compromisos. Paga como estés acostumbrado con tarjeta de crédito y descarga tu documento PDF inmediatamente.

Student with book image

“Comprado, descargado y aprobado. Así de fácil puede ser.”

Alisha Student

Preguntas frecuentes