Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Employee Benefits topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Osage County reviews employee health-plan options; requests quotes comparing current self-funded plan and state plan

3800908 · June 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

County benefits adviser presented cost comparisons between the current self-funded plan and the Kansas state plan; commissioners asked for side-by-side quotes and suggested surveying employees about coverage preferences.

On June 10 Osage County commissioners heard a presentation from the county’s benefits adviser comparing the county’s current self-funded health plan with the Kansas state plan and asked staff to prepare formal quotes so the board can evaluate coverage and cost trade-offs before plan renewal.

The adviser explained the county’s self-funded arrangement and presented estimated figures for 2024–2025. For 2025 the adviser presented a potential “worst-case” comparison showing the state plan’s total employer cost could be roughly $300,000 more than the county’s current maximum funding scenario, after estimated pharmacy rebates were netted off. The adviser said current year-to-date medical payments were down roughly 34 percent compared with the same period the prior year and noted that several large claims driving prior-year costs were no longer on the plan.

Commissioners and staff discussed employee contributions, plan design differences (deductibles, co-pays, coinsurance) and retention trade-offs: one commissioner emphasized that potential savings must be weighed against employee turnover risks. Commissioners asked the benefits adviser to produce: (1) a side-by-side quote comparing the county’s current self-funded plan to the state plan effective Jan. 1, (2) a quote showing current coverage if remaining self-funded but with requested plan design changes, and (3) a brief employee survey to gauge preferences.

No formal vote was taken; the board directed staff to return with written comparisons and recommended next steps before finalizing any changes for the approaching renewal window.