Hillsborough County committee reviews disability-insurance RFP; Standard shows lowest employer cost, rate-cap differences noted

At a Hillsborough County evaluation committee meeting, procurement staff and the Baldwin Group presented an analysis of three proposals submitted in response to RFP 25-00033, a solicitation for fully insured short- and long-term disability benefits for county employees. Sakina Ford, the county’s chief buyer for the project, opened the session and reminded attendees that the meeting was recorded and that the county’s cone of silence remains in effect.

The Baldwin Group’s senior client manager, Jamie Loeb, summarized the review and told committee members that “for the most part, your employees, your colleagues are not gonna see a change in benefit plan design with 1 with any 1 of these carriers.” That stability, the consultant said, is evident across the three proposals from The Standard; MetLife; and OCHS, Inc., submitting on behalf of Madison National Life.

Why it matters: the committee’s choice will affect Hillsborough County’s short- and long-term employer premium outlays, employee-paid premiums and the county’s budget exposure under a requested 10-year contract term. Cost differences and the presence or absence of multi-year rate caps were the primary distinctions discussed by procurement staff and the consultant.

Key findings presented by the Baldwin Group: - Proposers: The Standard; MetLife; and OCHS, Inc., on behalf of Madison National Life. The proposal from OCHS/Madison would make the county’s contract with OCHS rather than directly with Madison National Life, and OCHS would handle escalations and customer support. The Baldwin Group told the committee that this arrangement deviated from the RFP’s request for direct AM Best identification of the insurer. - Estimated employer premiums (normalized to a common covered-volume basis): The Standard ~ $6.1 million annually; MetLife ~ $6.7 million annually; OCHS/Madison ~ $6.3 million annually. The Baldwin Group highlighted roughly $467,000 in employer premium savings for the Standard compared with the next-lowest priced proposer over the first three years on an apples-to-apples basis. - Rate guarantees and caps: All three proposers offered a 36-month (three-year) rate guarantee. The Standard additionally proposed rate caps for subsequent renewals: a maximum of 7% annual increases for the two years immediately after the initial guarantee period and a maximum of 9% annual increases for the final five years of the 10-year contract term. The Baldwin Group emphasized that the caps establish a maximum increase, not a guaranteed increase. - Waiver-of-premium and FICA treatment: All proposers confirmed waiver-of-premium for long-term disability only (not for short-term disability). MetLife and the Madison/OCHS arrangement indicated they would not pay employer FICA for the first six months of a disability; The Standard indicated it would pay that FICA amount. - Plan design and member impact: The Baldwin Group said the three proposals generally matched the county’s existing plan definitions (including pregnancy benefits and earnings definitions) and that switching carriers would likely require standard transition provisions such as “actively at work” verifications for some employees. - Administrative and systems deviations: None of the proposers agreed to develop integration codes between Oracle and the county’s receiving systems or to accept a county-specified client-data file layout. The Baldwin Group flagged those items as “no” across the board. OCHS/Madison showed the most administrative deviations: more limited electronic-claims capabilities for some lines of business (OCHS said claims could be filed online, by mail, fax or email but indicated STD claims would be filed telephonically), no single dedicated claims examiner or sole contact, and limits on the level of detail provided in claims-denial reporting.

Other details and clarifications captured during discussion: - Short-term disability rate comparisons (normalized): MetLife 0.849; The Standard 0.890; OCHS/Madison 0.927. - Long-term disability rate examples (by rate class and buy-up): The Standard: 0.56 (class 1), 0.17 (class 2), buy-up 0.47. MetLife: 0.745, 0.219, buy-up 0.625. OCHS/Madison: 0.56, 0.165, buy-up 0.47. - Employer-premium totals shown in the executive summary excluded employee buy-up amounts; Baldwin noted the buy-up is offered but was removed from the employer-cost comparisons to maintain apples-to-apples estimates. - Reasonable-accommodation expense: The presentation confirmed a $25,000 reasonable-accommodation expense level in the RFP and said proposers matched that amount; one proposer’s paperwork required follow-up for legibility. - Historical context: Baldwin and committee members noted the county’s previous long-term disability renewal had seen a spike (Baldwin cited a 19% increase in a prior renewal) and that multi-year caps can limit large increases during later renewals.

Committee next steps and procedural items: - The committee agreed not to require oral presentations from proposers. Baldwin and procurement staff asked the committee to review the materials and prepare scores. Sakina Ford said questions must be routed to procurement and that the cone of silence remains in effect until the county posts a notice of intent to award or cancels the solicitation. - The committee tentatively reserved a Friday morning session for final scoring and recommended canceling an afternoon slot if the morning session is sufficient. Committee members were asked to submit clarifying questions to procurement in time for Baldwin to include responses in the Friday meeting materials.

What was not decided: The meeting did not include a formal vote or a recommendation to the county commission; scoring was left to the committee and scheduled for a subsequent session. No final award or contract action was taken at this meeting.

The committee closed the meeting with a reminder that all procurement questions and communications must flow through the chief buyer, and the recording was ended. The procurement cone of silence remains in effect until the county posts a notice of intent to award or cancels RFP 25-00033.