Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Employee Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Insurance broker outlines plan using third‑party administrator and reserve account; commissioners ask for more time
Summary
An insurance broker presented a proposal to shift Pratt County to a higher‑deductible plan administered with a third‑party claims administrator and a county-held reserve; staff and the broker outlined fees, estimated funding and operational steps and flagged additional paperwork the county would need to manage.
A representative for TIL Insurance presented Pratt County commissioners with a plan that pairs a higher‑deductible Blue Cross plan with a third‑party administrator (Freedom Claims) and a county reserve account to capture monthly savings.
Darren Booth, identified as with TIL Insurance, described the plan’s structure: the county would pay lower monthly premiums to Blue Cross for a high‑deductible option while transferring a monthly per‑person amount into a reserve to be administered for claims under the county’s self‑funding layer. Booth said the plan would charge a per‑member administrative fee — described in the presentation as $54 per covered person per month in the sample figures shown — and a one‑time setup fee of $2,000.
Booth gave numerical examples for Pratt County’s employee mix and said the proposal could produce savings over time. He characterized the program as a track plan that would “go to 20%” savings after initial years, and explained how claims would be processed: providers would first receive explanation of benefits (EOB) from Blue Cross, and then Freedom Claims would process the secondary portion. Booth warned that the dual‑card process can create a lag in patient billing — “it could be like a 45 day that deal,” he said — and that local providers and employees would need orientation to avoid duplicate or missed processing.
County staff raised operational concerns: additional paperwork and weekly claim processing demand for the county financial office; reports from a nearby municipality that pharmacy transactions (identified in that city’s experience as “Dylan’s”) sometimes required extra follow‑up; and that some employees might pay bills before the secondary processing completes. County staff also noted they had discussed the plan with the city clerk of nearby Pratt (identified as Brianna) and that the city had reported early savings and some implementation friction.
Next steps discussed included scheduling employee enrollment (the county discussed a possible June 1 effective date), confirming banking and ACH arrangements for a reserve account, and returning next week or at the next meeting with either approval to proceed or additional direction. No binding authorization to contract with Freedom Claims or to change health insurance was approved at this meeting.
Ending: Commissioners said they would review the proposal and consider a vote at a subsequent meeting; staff will return with paperwork and a recommendation if the board wants to proceed.
