Porter County approves renewal of core health‑plan contracts while pursuing market review

The Porter County Board of Commissioners on Aug. 15 approved renewal of the county’s third‑party administrator and stop‑loss reinsurance agreements for the county employee health plan while allowing staff to pursue additional market review of a vendor that has offered substantial potential savings.

Why it matters: The county’s health‑plan contracts expire in September, a time‑sensitive window for pricing and budgeting ahead of open enrollment. Commissioners said they must preserve coverage while still exploring options that could lower long‑term costs.

The board approved a motion to renew the county’s UMR third‑party administrator services and the stop‑loss reinsurance layers that protect the county from very large claims. A consultant to the county, identified in the meeting as Scott, told commissioners the two contracts are “the heart of the health insurance program.” Scott added, “UMR third party and the stop loss. Because we run out on both of those, which is the heart of the health insurance program.” The motion carried on a voice vote.

County benefits staff and their consultant, High Street (formerly GIS), also presented renewal scenarios and alternate options gathered in a market review. The consultant reported that the insurer‑side renewal offers would raise expected program costs by about 9.3 percent for medical and pharmacy combined; increasing the specific deductible to $200,000 (from $175,000) would lower the expected increase to about 7.5 percent, the presentation said.

At the same time, commissioners were presented with a separate vendor‑sourced alternative that the county had not previously pursued: a firm said it could achieve very large savings, potentially millions of dollars per year, under a reference‑based pricing or other design. Commissioners and staff agreed the county should not interrupt coverage or ongoing care for employees while exploring options — and several commissioners expressed both skepticism and a duty to investigate any credible savings.

One commissioner framed the timing constraint bluntly: “We have no choice. We have to renew those or they're gonna run out,” and the board voted to approve the core renewals so coverage would not lapse while staff continues vendor due diligence.

County staff said they will sign a nondisclosure agreement so the prospective vendor can review claims data and pricing structures; commissioners directed staff to return with findings and recommended next steps before year‑end. Staff also noted that some plan elements are already mid‑contract: the county is in year two of a three‑year care‑coordination agreement and will implement a pharmacy benefit manager change Oct. 1.

What wasn’t decided: Commissioners declined to adopt any broad change in plan design at the meeting and reiterated that earlier in the year they had voted not to pursue reference‑based pricing as a formal county path without further study. The board approved only the renewals that would be necessary to maintain uninterrupted coverage; further structural changes would be considered with additional analysis.

Next steps: Staff will finalize the renewals to avoid coverage gaps and continue negotiating or vetting alternative proposals; the county expects to have budget figures for the plan in time for fall budget work and November open enrollment.