Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Insurance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gadsden board hears Capital Health Plan, agent explain rising rates, utilization and bidding gaps
Summary
School officials were shown that the district’s single-employee premium share is $192.29 while the district covers about 78% of the total employee rate; presenters and CHP cited aging membership, utilization and a five‑year average medical loss ratio of about 122% as drivers of rate increases and said other carriers declined to bid in recent RFPs.
The Gadsden School District board on Tuesday heard a detailed presentation from its insurance agent, Pat Thomas & Associates, and a representative of Capital Health Plan (CHP) explaining why employee health premiums have been rising and why the district has repeatedly renewed coverage with CHP.
The agent said the district’s per-employee premium that the board covers is $681.75 while the employee share for single coverage is $192.29. The presenter read tiered annual premium figures for the current term: employee+spouse $1,748.78; employee+children $1,486.03; and employee family $2,534.99. The agent said the board contributes only the single/employee portion and that employees pay the remainder.
CHP’s representative, Debbie, told the board the district’s five‑year average medical loss ratio is about 122%, meaning that over the period CHP paid about $1.22 in claims for every dollar collected in premiums. She said that three main factors drive the district’s rating: the district’s aging membership, increased utilization and adverse claims experience. “A lot of this is demographic — you have a higher concentration of people 50 and older,” Debbie said, adding that a small share of members account for very large claims.
Board members questioned whether other carriers had bid. The agent said Aetna, UnitedHealthcare and Blue Cross Blue Shield declined to quote on the district’s RFPs, saying they could not compete with CHP’s pricing or plan design in this market. Debbie corroborated that CHP was the only bidder in many counties and said CHP pools members and then prices plans based on each group’s demographics; she also described differences between CHP plan options (capital selection 15/30/50 versus a higher‑copay “quality choice” plan).
The board discussed audit and policy expectations for how often to rebid the district’s insurance contract. At one point a board member cited a board policy allowing a 3–5 year contract window; another referenced an audit comment interpreted as requiring bidding every five years. The board directed staff to confirm the audit finding and compliance steps going forward.
CHP also recommended steps to reduce costly emergency-room use and increase lower-cost alternatives: expand telehealth use (Amwell) with a $15 copay, promote urgent-care and walk‑in clinic options (a $25 copay), and target outreach to frequent ER users. CHP said its materials and an app were provided in open-enrollment packets and offered to supply flyers for the district website. Board members asked CHP and the agent for quarterly utilization updates.
The agent described its retiree administration services (billing, collections and coordination with the Division of Retirement) provided at no cost to the board and said the district currently administers about 445 retirees through the agent’s processes. The agent said administrative compensation for retiree billing is $1.50 per policy per month and estimated typical broker/agent commissions for employer business run roughly 3% (sometimes reduced to 1.5% for district work).
What’s next: board members asked staff and the agent to return with any outstanding documentation on RFPs and to provide follow‑up utilization reports and quarterly updates on trends and driver analysis.
