On June 28th, 2019, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) released the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) Risk Adjustment Transfer Payment results for the 2018 benefit year. Within days of the announcement, Pareto published a preliminary analysis highlighting major trends and year-over-year comparisons into state average metrics, issuer transfer payments, and high-cost risk pool payments. Over the last few weeks, the Pareto team dove deeper into the data to uncover even more meaningful insights from the results, which we have shared below.

Macro-Level Market Themes

Issuers in the ACA experienced larger variances between minimum and maximum transfer payments in 2018 compared to 2017. In the Individual Market, variances in transfer payments were driven by rising premiums across almost all states outpacing the decline in enrollment. The Individual Market continued to see an outflow of players in many state markets, including 5 states that now only have one insurer offering coverage (AK, DE, IA, NE, WY). The Small Group Market continued to stabilize in 2018 after further decreases in premiums and increases in enrollment.

IndividualSmall Group
2017201820172018
Max Inflow (Receipt)$666M$785M$217M$207M
Max Outflow (Payment)($344M)($501M)($337M)($312M)
Range$1,010M$1,286M$554M$519M

Note: The above are distinct transfer payment values and are not summations by year.

Continued Reduction in Enrollment

Premium Stabilization

High-Cost Risk Pools

In Benefit Year 2018, CMS introduced “High-Cost Risk Pools” (“HCRP”), a program that reimburses issuers $0.60 for every dollar spent exceeding $1M on an individual patient. Pareto analyzed the results of the HCRP payments and found minimal correlation between transfer payments and high-cost risk pool payments. This illustrates the one-off nature of HCRP payments. A plan may have one very costly member, but the risk of this member is not large enough to move the needle on transfer payments. 70% of Small Group and 51% of Individual plans did not receive a HCRP payment for 2018.

Market Exits

Individual: 141 issuers exited the Individual Market in 2018, an increase from 129 exits in 2017 and 105 in 2016. In general, we are seeing a large portion of National plans exiting across the U.S. Aetna, United, and Humana made up over 55% of the total Individual Market exits. As a result, five states are left with only one issuer for 2018 (and no transfer payments): Iowa, Nebraska, Delaware, Alaska, and Wyoming. Texas and Illinois led the way with a decrease of nine and seven issuers, respectively.

Small Group: 53 issuers exited the Small Group Market, the same number in 2017 and down from 116 in 2016. This further supports the idea of stabilization in the Small Group Market.

Issuer-Specific Insights

Top Receivers in 2018

Blue Shield of California$784,798,234
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida (16842)$694,838,642
Health Care Services Corporation – Texas$435,834,956
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan$105,190,785
Health Care Service Corporation – Illinois$102,754,253

Top Payers in 2018

Centene Corporation – Florida($501,224,664)
Kaiser Permanente – California($392,457,699)
Molina Healthcare – Texas($264,718,028)
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida (30252)($182,573,674)
Kaiser Permanente – Maryland($119,992,217)

As National plans drop out of the market in 2018, a greater divide between the Blues and Regional/Provider-Owned Plans is occurring. The Blues transfer inflows are increasing at the expense of Regional/Provider-Owned Plans.

Kaiser
Individual Market: Large outflows across all states, issuers, and marketsSmall Group Market: Large outflows in CA and WA
MolinaIndividual Market: Large outflows in FL, TX, and CA, with the main receivers being Blues in these states
CenteneIndividual Market: Large outflows in FL and TX, with the main receivers being Blues in these statesCignaIndividual Market: Large outflows in IL and VA, with the main receivers being Blues in these states

State Profiles and Highlights

Utah

Individual Market

Iowa

Individual Market

Small Group Market

Nebraska

Individual Market

Small Group Market

Illinois

Individual Market

Small Group Market

Percent Change in Premium vs. Current Year Premium

What Should Issuers Do?

It is critical for issuers to fully understand the makeup of their transfer payment. What were the primary and secondary drivers? Were there opportunities to change the outcome that should inform 2019 and 2020 strategies? Every issuer should be able to answer the following questions:

Knowing the answers to these questions for 2018 will allow issuers to focus on improvement opportunities that can have a material impact on 2019 results and beyond.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Fill out the form to take the first step toward reaching your goals. Share a few details so we can provide the right resources and support tailored just for you.

Fill out the form to take the first step toward reaching your goals. Share a few details so we can provide the right resources and support tailored just for you.