by admin | Jul 6, 2017 | Employee Benefits, Group Benefit Plans
In conversations with HR professionals and benefit brokers, we find that the topic of long-term care insurance (LTCi) is often covered in less than two minutes during renewal meetings. When I ask why the topic of conversation is so short, they tell me, “Employees just aren’t asking about it, so they must not be interested.”
If employees aren’t asking about LTCi, does it mean they aren’t interested? They just may be unaware of the value of LTCi and that it can be offered by their employer with concessions not available in the open market. Here are the top seven reasons why LTCi should be a bigger part of the employee benefits conversation.
- Do you know LTCi can be offered as an employee benefit?
There are multiple employer-sponsored products, including those with pricing discounts, guarantee issue, and payroll deduction.
- Do you believe Medicaid and Medicare will provide long-term care for employees?
This is a popular misconception. Medicare and Medicaid will restrict your employees’ choices of where and how they receive care. These options will either not offer custodial or home care, or they’ll force employees to spend down their assets for care.
- Do you think LTCi is too expensive, or that your employee population is too young to need it?
Many plans can be customized to meet personal budgets and potential care needs. It’s also important to know that rates are based on employees’ ages. The younger the employees are, the lower their rates will be.
- Are you aware of the variety of LTCi plans?
Many policies offer flexible coverage options. Depending on the policy an employer selects, LTCi can cover a wide range of care—in some cases even adult day care and home safety modifications.
- Do you believe the market is unstable?
Today’s products are priced based on conservative assumptions, and employers are enrolling very stable LTCi plans for their employees. Each month, we see new plan options and products being introduced along with new carriers entering the market.
- Do you already offer an LTCi plan but it’s closed to new hires?
Being able to offer a similar LTCi benefit to all employees is crucial for most employers. Find a partner that can assist with the current LTCi plan and can assist with bringing in a new LTCi offering for new hires
By Christine McCullugh
Originally Posted By www.ubabenefits.com
by admin | Jun 30, 2017 | ACA, Group Benefit Plans
Earlier this month, the Department of Labor (DOL) provided an informational FAQ relating to the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) and the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act). This is the DOL’s 38th FAQ on implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) provisions and related regulations. The DOL is requesting comments on a draft model form for participants to use to request information regarding nonquantitative treatment limitations, and confirms that benefits for eating disorders must comply with the MHPAEA. Comments are due by September 13, 2017.
The MHPAEA amended various laws and regulations to provide increased parity between mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits. Generally, financial requirements such as coinsurance and copays and treatment limitations for mental health and substance use disorder benefits cannot be more restrictive than requirements for medical and surgical benefits. Regulations also provide that a plan or issuer may not impose a nonquantitative treatment limitation (NQTL) unless it is comparable and no more stringent than limitations on medical and surgical benefits in the same classification.
On December 13, 2016, President Obama signed the 21st Century Cures Act into law. The Cures Act has numerous components including directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Labor, and Secretary of the Treasury (collectively, the Agencies) to issue compliance program guidance, share findings with each other, and issue guidance to group health plans and health insurance issuers to help them comply with the mental health parity rules.
The Agencies must issue guidance to group health plans and health insurance issuers; the guidance must provide information and methods that plans and issuers can use when they are required to disclose information to participants, beneficiaries, contracting providers, or authorized representatives to ensure the plans’ and issuers’ compliance with the mental health parity rules.
The Agencies must issue the compliance program guidance and guidance to group health plans and health plan issuers within 12 months after the date that the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Reform Act of 2016 was enacted, or by December 13, 2017.
In the June 2017 FAQ, the DOL reiterated its request for comments on the following questions, originally asked in the fall of 2016:
- Whether issuance of model forms that could be used by participants and their representatives to request information with respect to various NQTLs would be helpful and, if so, what content the model forms should include. For example, is there a specific list of documents, relating to specific NQTLs, that a participant or his or her representative should request?
- Do different types of NQTLs require different model forms? For example, should there be separate model forms for specific information about medical necessity criteria, fail-first policies, formulary design, or the plan’s method for determining usual, customary, or reasonable charges? Should there be a separate model form for plan participants and other individuals to request the plan’s analysis of its MHPAEA compliance?
- Whether issuance of model forms that could be used by States as part of their review would be helpful and, if so, what content the model form should include. For example, what specific content should the form include to assist the States in determining compliance with the NQTL standards? Should the form focus on specific classifications or categories of services? Should the form request information on particular NQTLs?
- What other steps can the Departments take to improve the scope and quality of disclosures or simplify or otherwise improve processes for requesting disclosures under existing law in connection with mental health/substance misuse disorder MH/SUD benefits?
- Are there specific steps that could be taken to improve State market conduct examinations and/or Federal oversight of compliance by plans and issuers?
The DOL is also asking for input on a draft model form that participants, enrollees, or representatives could use to request information from their health plan or issuer regarding NQTLs that may affect their MH/SUD benefits.
The Cures Act also requires that benefits for eating disorders be consistent with the requirements of MHPAEA. The DOL clarified that the MHPAEA applies to any benefits a plan or issuer may offer for treatment of an eating disorder.
By Danielle Capilla
Originally Posted By www.ubabenefits.com
by admin | May 10, 2017 | ACA, Group Benefit Plans, Health & Wellness
Workplace wellness programs have increased popularity through the years. According to the most recent UBA Health Plan Survey, 49 percent of firms with 200+ employees offering health benefits in 2016 offered wellness programs. Workplace wellness programs’ popularity also brought controversy and hefty discussions about what works to improve population health and which programs comply with the complex legal standards of multiple institutions that have not really “talked” to each other in the past. To “add wood to the fire,” the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) made public some legal actions that shook the core of the wellness industry, such as EEOC vs. Honeywell International, and EEOC vs. Orion Energy Systems.
To ensure a wellness program is compliant with the ACA, GINA and the EEOC, let’s first understand what each one of these institutions are.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is a comprehensive healthcare reform law enacted in March 2010 during the Obama presidency. It has three primary goals: to make health insurance available to more people, to expand the Medicaid program, and to support innovative medical care delivery methods to lower the cost of healthcare overall.1 The ACA carries provisions that support the development of wellness programs and determines all rules around them.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) is a federal law that protects individuals from genetic discrimination in health insurance and employment. GINA relates to wellness programs in different ways, but it particularly relates to the gathering of genetic information via a health risk assessment.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a federal agency that administers and enforces civil rights laws against workplace discrimination. In 2017, the EEOC issued a final rule to amend the regulations implementing Title II of GINA as they relate to employer-sponsored wellness program. This rule addresses the extent to which an employer may offer incentives to employees and spouses.
Here is some advice to ensure your wellness program is compliant with multiple guidelines.
- Make sure your wellness program is “reasonably designed” and voluntary – This means that your program’s main goal should be to promote health and prevent disease for all equally. Additionally, it should not be burdensome for individuals to participate or receive the incentive. This means you must offer reasonable alternatives for qualifying for the incentive, especially for individuals whose medical conditions make it unreasonably difficult to meet specific health-related standards. I always recommend wellness programs be as simple as possible, and before making a change or decision in the wellness program, identify all difficult or unfair situations that might arise from this change, and then run them by your company’s legal counsel and modify the program accordingly before implementing it. An example of a wellness program that is NOT reasonably designed is a program offering a health risk assessment and biometric screening without providing results or follow-up information and advice. A wellness program is also NOT reasonably designed if exists merely to shift costs from an employer to employees based on their health.
- Do the math! – Recent rules implemented changes in the ACA that increased the maximum permissible wellness program reward from 20 percent to 30 percent of the cost of self-only health coverage (50 percent if the program includes tobacco cessation). Although the final rules are not clear on incentives for spouses, it is expected that, for wellness programs that apply to employees and their spouses, the maximum incentive for either the employee or spouse will be 30 percent of the total cost of self-only coverage. In case an employer offers more than one group health plan but participation in a wellness program is open to all employees regardless of whether they are enrolled in a plan, the employer may offer a maximum incentive of 30 percent of the lowest cost major medical self-only plan it offers. As an example, if a single plan costs $4,000, the maximum incentive would be $1,200.
- Provide a notice to all eligible to participate in your wellness program – The EEOC made it easy for everyone and posted a sample notice online at https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/regulations/ada-wellness-notice.cfm. Your notice should include information on the incentive amount you are offering for different programs, how you maintain privacy and security of all protected health information (PHI) as well as who to contact if participants have question or concerns.
- If using a HRA (health risk assessment), do not include family medical history questions – The EEOC final rule, which expands on GINA’s rules, makes it clear that “an employer is permitted to request information about the current or past health status of an employee’s spouse who is completing a HRA on a voluntary basis, as long as the employer follows GINA rules about requesting genetic information when offering health or genetic services. These rules include requirements that the spouse provide prior, knowing, written, and voluntary authorization for the employer to collect genetic information, just as the employee must do, and that inducements in exchange for this information are limited.”2 Due to the complexity and “gray areas” this item can reach, my recommendation is to keep it simple and to leave genetic services and genetic counseling out of a comprehensive wellness program.
WellSteps, a nationwide wellness provider, has a useful tool that everyone can use. Their “wellness compliance checker” should not substituted for qualified legal advice, but can be useful for a high level check on how compliant your wellness program is. You can access it at https://www.wellsteps.com/resources/tools.
I often stress the need for all wellness programs to build a strong foundation, which starts with the company’s and leaders’ messages. Your company should launch a wellness program because you value and care about your employees’ (and their families’) health and well-being. Everything you do and say should reflect this philosophy. While I always recommend companies to carefully review all regulations around wellness, I do believe that if your wellness program has a strong foundation based on your corporate social responsibility and your passion for building a healthy workplace, you most likely will be within the walls of all these rules. At the end, a workplace that does wellness the right way has employees who are not motivated by financial incentives, but by their intrinsic motivation to be the best they can be as well as their acceptance that we all must be responsible for our own health, and that all corporations should be responsible for providing the best environment and opportunities for employees to do so.
By Valeria S. Tivnan
Originally Posted By www.ubabenefits.com
by admin | May 1, 2017 | ACA, Benefit Management, Group Benefit Plans, Human Resources
On April 18, 2017, the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) published its final rule regarding Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) market stabilization.
The rule amends standards relating to special enrollment periods, guaranteed availability, and the timing of the annual open enrollment period in the individual market for the 2018 plan year, standards related to network adequacy and essential community providers for qualified health plans, and the rules around actuarial value requirements.
The proposed changes primarily affect the individual market. However, to the extent that employers have fully insured plans, some of the proposed changes will affect those employers’ plans because the changes affect standards that apply to issuers.
The regulations are effective on June 17, 2017.
Among other things impacting group plans, the rule provided clarifications to the scope of the guaranteed availability policy regarding unpaid premiums. The guaranteed availability provisions require health insurance issuers offering non-grandfathered coverage in the individual or group market to offer coverage to and accept every individual and employer that applies for such coverage unless an exception applies. Individuals and employers must usually pay the first month’s premium to activate coverage.
CMS previously interpreted the guaranteed availability provisions so that a consumer would be allowed to purchase coverage under a different product without having to pay past due premiums. Further, if an individual tried to renew coverage in the same product with the same issuer, then the issuer could apply the enrollee’s upcoming premium payments to prior non-payments.
Under the final rule and as permitted by state law, an issuer may apply the initial premium payment to any past-due premium amounts owed to that issuer. If the issuer is part of a controlled group, the issuer may apply the initial premium payment to any past-due premium amounts owed to any other issuer that is a member of that controlled group, for coverage in the 12-month period preceding the effective date of the new coverage.
Practically speaking, when an individual or employer makes payment in the amount required to trigger coverage and the issuer lawfully credits all or part of that amount to past-due premiums, the issuer will determine that the consumer made insufficient initial payment for new coverage.
This policy applies both inside and outside of the Exchanges in the individual, small group, and large group markets, and during applicable open enrollment or special enrollment periods.
This policy does not permit a different issuer (other than one in the same controlled group as the issuer to which past-due premiums are owed) to condition new coverage on payment of past-due premiums or permit any issuer to condition new coverage on payment of past-due premiums by any individual other than the person contractually responsible for the payment of premiums.
Issuers adopting this premium payment policy, as well as any issuers that do not adopt the policy but are within an adopting issuer’s controlled group, must clearly describe the consequences of non-payment on future enrollment in all paper and electronic forms of their enrollment application materials and any notice that is provided regarding premium non-payment.
By Danielle Capilla, Originally Published By United Benefit Advisors
by admin | Apr 14, 2017 | Benefit Management, Group Benefit Plans
Many employers understand the value of having an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) since the heart and soul of organizations are employees. Employees who are physically and mentally healthy, highly productive, engaged in their work, and loyal to their employer contribute positively to their employer’s bottom line. Fortunately, most employees are positive contributors, yet even the best of employees can occasionally have issues or circumstances arise that may inadvertently impact their jobs in a negative way. Having an EAP in place that can address these issues early may mitigate any negative impact to the workplace. This is a win-win for both employees and employers.
A key component of EAP services lies in “catching things early” by assisting employees and helping them address and resolve issues before they impact the workplace. Most employees will use EAP services on a voluntary, self-referred basis that is completely confidential. Some employers may wonder if services are even being used by employees because it won’t be all that apparent, but most EAPs provide a utilization or usage report that will show the number of people served, and possibly the types of reasons services were requested.
If employee issues do begin to appear in the workplace—related to performance, attendance, behavior, or safety—it is important for managers, supervisors, and human resources to also have access to EAP services. They may wish to consult with an employee assistance professional that can provide guidance and direction leading to problem identification and resolution. These issues have the potential to become very costly for the organization—and again, the earlier they can be addressed, the greater chance of success for both employee and employer, with minimal negative impact to the company’s bottom line.
The key to getting the most out of an EAP is to make it easily accessible to employees, safe to use, and visible enough they remember to use it. It is important that employees understand using the EAP is confidential and their identity will not be disclosed to anyone in their organization. Promoting the EAP services with materials such as flyers, posters, or website information with EAP contact information will also increase the likelihood of employees accessing services.
By Nancy Cannon, Originally Published By United Benefit Advisors
by admin | Apr 5, 2017 | Benefit Management, Group Benefit Plans
In the first part of this two-part blog, I recommended a number of important items to keep in mind as you select a stop loss carrier. Additionally, here are a few other things you will want to look for, or ask about, when selecting a stop loss carrier. While this is not an exhaustive list, these are some of the most frequent items I have seen that cause issues or gaps in coverage.
Plan Mirroring
Does the stop loss carrier “mirror” its policy to your employee benefit plan document? I like to think of this whole plan mirroring approach as kind of hand in glove. The relationship between the employee benefit plan document and the stop loss policy should be a complement to one another.
Your employee benefit plan document and your stop loss policy are two separate documents containing many different provisions and terms. Without plan mirroring, stop loss carriers will audit to their stop loss contracts, which can, and do, result in gaps in coverage. Make sure you work with a carrier who will provide plan mirroring.
Medical Necessity Determinations
Although a stop loss carrier can follow plan language, some do, and will, question determinations made by the plan for medical necessity. Stop loss carriers differ on their level of scrutiny in this area. The reality is the medical field is not always black and white on how to treat a patient. It is important to understand the carrier’s position and also the medical guidelines used by your administrative services only (ASO) carrier or third-party administrator (TPA) in making medical determinations.
Recognition of Network Requirements
With your employee benefit plan, you are most likely using a preferred provider organization (PPO) network where provider claims are subject to payment based on an agreed schedule. The agreement you have to access this network predicates what the plan will pay the provider for their services.
A stop loss carrier who is not party to this agreement may question the payment methodology, or feel it can do better on certain claims. They rely on cost containment vendors to review claims and determine what they might feel would be “reasonable” payments. If this is the case, you, as an employer, may be left with a gap in coverage as you are required under your employee benefit plan to reimburse the provider at the contracted rate, but your stop loss carrier may not reimburse you to that level.
It is important to know your stop loss carrier’s position on this type of situation.
Claim Turnaround
Find out what the carrier’s commitment is to paying claims. Many carriers have standards that can vary greatly by carrier. With stop loss, you are typically dealing with large dollar amounts and from a cash flow perspective, you want to know what your carrier’s policy is regarding claims payment.
Will the carrier allow for “advanced funding?” If so, the claim is first adjudicated and processed, but not paid until the stop loss carrier has reimbursed the portion over the stop loss deductible. This, in turn, minimizes the disruption to your cash flow. Many, but not all, carriers offer advanced funding and some will charge an additional fee.
You will want to check with your broker or administrator on the carriers you are considering and what their specific requirements are for advanced funding.
Reasonable and Customary (R&C)
R&C is also known as usual and customary (U&C). As noted earlier, most employee benefit plans take advantage of PPO networks, where provider claims are subject to payment based on an agreed schedule. Outside of claims through a PPO, most plans limit claims payments or reimbursements to R&C charges. This describes the amount an ASO carrier or TPA decides to use as the starting point in the payment for a service.
In each case, it is important to ensure that the employee benefit plan’s definition agrees with the stop loss policy, or that the stop loss policy will follow the provisions of the employee benefit plan.
Secondary Network Access Fees
Typically, a TPA or ASO carrier will provide access to a “secondary” or specialty-type network, such as a transplant-only network. The advantage is that the employee benefit plan and member gain access to discounts, or additional discounts above and beyond that of the primary network offering.
In these cases, there is typically an access fee usually set as a percentage of the savings achieved that is the responsibility of the employee benefit plan. These fees are NOT always reimbursable by the stop loss carrier, or the stop loss carrier may put a limit on the amount reimbursed.
Check with your broker or administrator on whether stop loss carriers you are considering will reimburse you for these types of fees.
While these six considerations are not a comprehensive list, they will certainly set you on the right path for discussions with your broker, or administrator, on selecting a stop loss carrier that not only meets your needs, but also provides the protection necessary for your employee benefit plan and company.
By Steven Goethel, Originally Published By United Benefit Advisors
