Lubbock ISD staff outline health-plan survey results, wellness incentives and pending vendor bids

Lisa, staff member for Lubbock ISD, presented the district’s year‑to‑date health‑plan data and employee survey results to the Board of Trustees and outlined next steps in evaluating vendors for 2026 coverage.

The presentation summarized claim trends and employee feedback, noting the district’s target for the plan’s claims‑loss ratio: “Our claims loss or maximum claims loss ratio wanna be 87 or less,” Lisa said, describing that goal as a benchmark for a large self‑insured plan.

Why it matters: the district is preparing plan options for 2026 that could change monthly premiums, deductibles and benefits such as the district’s no‑cost (“0 co‑pay”) clinics and the $50 monthly wellness premium credit. Staff emphasized those benefits are an important part of total compensation for employees who use the plan.

Key facts and figures from the presentation: the district’s employee survey had 778 responses, including 491 teachers and 133 paraprofessionals; employees ranked monthly premium cost (40.4%) and out‑of‑pocket costs (33.3%) as their top concerns. Lisa said 85% of respondents value the 0‑co‑pay clinic service and 77–78% view the wellness program as important. The district currently offers a $50 monthly premium reduction for employees who meet wellness requirements. Lisa also said the district reimburses up to $2,500 per year for diabetes‑related costs and that annual diabetic reimbursements total “around $35 to $40,000 a year.”

Staff described the wellness qualification steps: employees must enroll, complete a health‑risk assessment, do required classes or submit preventive screenings and complete the district’s wellness screening by the November 15 deadline to receive next‑year credits. Lisa said the wellness screenings are scheduled at campuses beginning in July and are free to employees and dependents who participate.

On pharmacy and high‑cost claims, Lisa noted last year’s stop‑loss activity: “Last year in February, we were already filing our first stop loss claim because we had claims over $350,000,” and reminded trustees that claims for a plan year can continue to arrive for a year after the date of service.

Procurement and timeline: Lisa reported two bids were received for the 0 co‑pay clinic contracts (RFPs closed Monday at 2:00 p.m.), and roughly eight proposals were submitted for the medical/prescription/dental bid. She said the procurement team is vetting proposals with Marsh McLennan and expects to bring options and a recommendation to the board’s August workshop (final recommendation scheduled for the August 28 board meeting) so open enrollment materials can be prepared in October.

Employee preferences and tradeoffs: staff summarized survey responses about fully funded plans (for example, TRS‑style plans). “Overwhelmingly, our employees said no,” Lisa said, explaining that a fully funded plan would likely reduce local control over benefits such as the 0‑co‑pay clinics and wellness credits. Staff also presented side‑by‑side premium comparisons for the district’s plans versus other local and statewide offerings to show how premium/deductible tradeoffs affect employees.

Questions from trustees focused on diabetes medication cost inflation, how employees qualify for wellness credits and the one‑year window for late arriving claims. Lisa and her team said they will continue campus outreach, publish FAQs and meet individually with employees who request plan guidance.

Ending note: staff reiterated that the district’s outreach and vendor evaluation will continue through the summer, and that trustees will receive updated bid analysis and premium scenarios before the board must adopt benefit choices and public enrollment materials later in the summer.